[oystersourced]

If you don't think that the BlackBerry Android runtime is based on AOSP you have not done any digging into the BB10 at all. AOSP is there not even too far under the surface. Plus, it is incompatible because BlackBerry does not support all the Android APIs.

Load Ghost Commander and see all the parts of AOSP Android that are there and can be loaded but that BlackBerry keeps hidden from view.

Again, everything you write is based on things that are demonstrably false.

You again have presumed ideas about what forking is or what fragmentation is. Go work for Google and your views might actually mean something. Until you do, what you think about it isn't nearly as important as what Google has said and done about these things.




Posted via CB10
Attachment 358638

I have no idea why you repeatedly base your posts on an incorrect assumption that I have stated something false, or not even stated at all? I did not disagree that BlackBerry have used part of the AOSP (it's not based on AOSP code like Amazon's Fire OS), I stated it was debatable that BlackBerry's implementation is a fork, I explained that their own integration does not seek to cause fragmentation but compatibility, if you read my posts you should know this already instead of being so argumentative. It's regretful that you are not able to understand my point and seek to argue based on your own incorrect assumptions and theories. If the prerequisite to contribute to a discussion on CrackBerry was to be a Google employee with intimate knowledge of commercial agreements or proprietary code of competitors then I could have saved us both a lot of typing and told you that forum rule from the start.

I know what a software fork is and I understand what the term fragmentation means, I also fully understand why the OHA was set up. Surprisingly I can also read what Google's case was against Acer and Aliyun and how that differed to Samsung and Tizen. I am starting to realise that none of that counts for anything in your mind because when you look into the technicalities instead of just focusing on the headline it conflicts with your belief that's it's black and white whether you are allowed to be in the OHA and support both a BlackBerry 10 device in its current form and Android. Foxconn do both, jeez you even argued that Foxconn wasn't an OHA member. The logical assumption would be that Google are content that the BlackBerry 10 runtime is not of concern not that Foxconn have done an agreement behind closed doors. The precedent is there for BlackBerry to do both.

It's absolutely crystal clear that we are on different wavelengths. It's really tiring explaining my original point over and over again and telling you that I have not said something which you believe I have. I have added an annotation to this thread to hopefully avoid confusion.

Posted via CB10

[lawguyman]

I have no idea why you repeatedly base your posts on an incorrect assumption that I have stated something false, or not even stated at all? I did not disagree that BlackBerry have used part of the AOSP (it's not based on AOSP code like Amazon's Fire OS), I stated it was debatable that BlackBerry's implementation is a fork, I explained that their own integration does not seek to cause fragmentation but compatibility, if you read my posts you should know this already instead of being so argumentative. It's regretful that you are not able to understand my point and seek to argue based on your own incorrect assumptions and theories. If the prerequisite to contribute to a discussion on CrackBerry was to be a Google employee with intimate knowledge of commercial agreements or proprietary code of competitors then I could have saved us both a lot of typing and told you that forum rule from the start.

I know what a software fork is and I understand what the term fragmentation means, I also fully understand why the OHA was set up. Surprisingly I can also read what Google's case was against Acer and Aliyun and how that differed to Samsung and Tizen. I am starting to realise that none of that counts for anything in your mind because when you look into the technicalities instead of just focusing on the headline it conflicts with your belief that's it's black and white whether you are allowed to be in the OHA and support both a BlackBerry 10 device in its current form and Android. Foxconn do both, jeez you even argued that Foxconn wasn't an OHA member. The logical assumption would be that Google are content that the BlackBerry 10 runtime is not of concern not that Foxconn have done an agreement behind closed doors. The precedent is there for BlackBerry to do both.

It's absolutely crystal clear that we are on different wavelengths. It's really tiring explaining my original point over and over again and telling you that I have not said something which you believe I have.

Posted via CB10

We are on different wavelengths.

You think that compatible means not supporting APIs that Android does. You also think that compatible includes substituting Google Services for BlackBerry ones (as in MapView).

When you load an APK BlackBerry has a disclaimer about how things may not be compatible

So compatible means incompatible.




Posted via CB10

[oystersourced]

We are on different wavelengths.

You think that compatible means not supporting APIs that Android does. You also think that compatible includes substituting Google Services for BlackBerry ones (as in MapView).

When you load an APK BlackBerry has a disclaimer about how things may not be compatible

So compatible means incompatible.

Posted via CB10

Not supporting API's or handling the Android to BlackBerry 10 translations does not cause incompatibilities with vanilla Android OS, developing new features that do not exist in vanilla Android OS does. That is my point. At no point is somebody going to create an app that calls for features that are supported in the Android Runtime but not in vanilla Android OS. If this was possible BlackBerry's implementation would definitely be considered a fork that causes fragmentation. BlackBerry's implementation although not complete in its support of Android seeks to be compatible. I never even considered we were talking about compatibility of Android apps with the BlackBerry Android Runtime, I've had my phone for two years, I'm not an *****.

I'm not surprised to see you jumping to silly and unwarranted conclusions about what you believe I think again.

Posted via CB10

[russworman]

My question would be... could they join the oha if they were to enable all the original android apis and blackberry 10 functioned more like a skin or launcher over android?

Posted via CB10

[lawguyman]

My question would be... could they join the oha if they were to enable all the original android apis and blackberry 10 functioned more like a skin or launcher over android?

Posted via CB10

No. The OHA agreement states that the Device can run only the Android OS.

Keep in mind that these rules are not set in stone. As a contract, the parties can agree to anything.

Posted via CB10

[ChrisLeNeve]

I don't understand these rumours of removing the Android runtime at all. It's one thing for BlackBerry to create an Android phone but how does that suggest they'll remove the Android runtime from BB10? And above all WHY would they do such a thing? I couldn't use BB10 if it didn't have the runtime. I wouldn't have basic apps like Skype, Sonos, Google Maps. So I would be forced to go Android.

Sorry, I'd like to typo but my Q10 doesn't support it.

[2Peks1Bird]

I don't understand these rumours of removing the Android runtime at all. It's one thing for BlackBerry to create an Android phone but how does that suggest they'll remove the Android runtime from BB10? And above all WHY would they do such a thing? I couldn't use BB10 if it didn't have the runtime. I wouldn't have basic apps like Skype, Sonos, Google Maps. So I would be forced to go Android.

Sorry, I'd like to typo but my Q10 doesn't support it.

If you read this thread you'll know the answer to your own question.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[conite]

As it appears to stand now, when a company sells a fully OHA-compliant Android phone, they cannot sell another model with a non compliant version - like the Android Runtime on BB10.

If the Runtime is no longer shipped with BB10, but becomes a "non-sanctioned" 3rd party download, then maybe this would be a way around it.

Ultimately, Google gets to decide what BlackBerry can and can't do.

Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.2252

[bitje]

Let me clarify what I mean.

First, Android uses the Dalvik virtual machine to essentially run applications written in Java. Second it uses the Linux kernel as an operating system.

I know that BB can not package the Play Services... but I was more speculating about the real reason behind this... "and since they couldn't get all your data when running in a sandbox they would probably say no.."

You're wrong on a lot of points. First off, Android is an OS. Second BB can not package Play Services because they are not part of the OHA (and they never will be).

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

[anon(679606)]

Lots of apps are now $0.89 when they were $2-5 previously... same thing happened before the end of webOS...death rattle ?? Just sayin'

Posted via CB10

[extisis]

Lots of apps are now $0.89 when they were $2-5 previously... same thing happened before the end of webOS...death rattle ?? Just sayin'

Posted via CB10

Ok... which ones

Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.680

[anon(679606)]

On BBW click SUMMER SALE

Ok... which ones

Z30STA100-5/10.3.2.680

[extisis]

On BBW click SUMMER SALE

that's a sale then.. you were saying it like the apps are definitively at those prices.

so to compare it to a webos situation... highly inaccurate. there's always summer and winter sales on BBW. even giveaways... yet the OS is still going strong. go figure.

[RAMChYLD]

Why can't they have an improvise?

Android is just a runtime, like Java. The OS running the show in background is actually Linux (and yes, is extremely fragmented in actuality. MediaTek maintains their own fork of the Linux kernel, as do Rockchip, Allwinner, etc., which is given to the companies that make phones using their chips). If you put Android on top of QNX, would it even matter assuming that Linux and QNX both are POSIX compliant and the runtime can be targeted to compile without modifications? It's just like the BSD/Linux/Solaris/illumOS situation on desktops- does it matter if the OS is OpenBSD, illumOS or Linux provided that it has a common Java runtime that runs whatever Java program you want to run? Substitute Java for Dalvik and it's the same situation for Blackberry and Google now- as long as QNX has all the API that Dalvik needs to compile properly and the necessary ABI to reply to calls during runtime, no modification is needed to the Dalvik runtime. And dynamic recompilation allows native code to run without recompilation, which I think doesn't violate on Google's OHA terms.

PS: I believe one of Google's head honcho is a big Blackberry fan, so maybe he can work something out with Blackberry and it will all work out in the end- either Google will change their rules a bit so that BBRY can use Android officially, or grant BBRY the same exception that Samsung has with Tizen (sure, now the Android runtime is a separate download, but it's a small inconvenience to me, and even a plus to some since those who don't use Android apps will now have some more free space on their devices).

[Ment]

Why can't they have an improvise?

Android is just a runtime, like Java. The OS running the show in background is actually Linux (and yes, is extremely fragmented in actuality. MediaTek maintains their own fork, as do Rockchip, Allwinner, etc., which is given to the companies that make phones using their chips). If you put Android on top of QNX, would it even matter assuming that Linux and QNX both are POSIX compliant and the runtime can be targeted to compile without modifications? It's just like the BSD/Linux/Solaris/illumOS situation on desktops- does it matter if the OS is OpenBSD, illumOS or Linux provided that it has a common Java runtime that runs whatever Java program you want to run? Substitute Java for Dalvik and it's the same situation for Blackberry and Google now- as long as QNX has all the API that Dalvik needs to compile properly and the necessary ABI to reply to calls during runtime, no modification is needed to the Dalvik runtime. And dynamic recompilation allows native code to run without recompilation, which I think doesn't violate on Google's OHA terms.

PS: I believe one of Google's head honcho is a big Blackberry fan, so maybe he can work something out with Blackberry and it will all work out in the end- either Google will change their rules a bit so that BBRY can use Android officially, or grant BBRY the same exception that Samsung has with Tizen.

Its not a technical problem. The Android runtime has been shown to run on Android,BB10, Tizen, Aliyun, WebOS, SailFish, ChromeOS and probably a few other OS. Google Apps which are proprietary to Google is the sticking point, to get them one has to pass technical requirements and business requirements some of which until now were dismissed out of hand by forumers and BB, thus the content of this thread.

[EchuOkan1]

I've read in a few posts here that 10.3.3 will be the last BB10 OS update, and that it will remove the android runtime to comply with OHA stuff.

Where the heck do these rumors come from??? I'm curious to know some the sources of these rumors.

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android

Yeah, I just checked my crystal ball and that is correct. No doubt about it. Also, I found the same on Facebook this confirming what appeared on the crystal ball. =0)

Posted via CB10