[oleg mosin]

Hi all! I'm new on BlackBerry os10 and I have BlackBerry passport. Try to find any information about why we still use 4.3 android

[QNX4all]

Hi all! I'm new on BlackBerry os10 and I have BlackBerry passport. Try to find any information about why we still use 4.3 android

Agreement between BlackBerry and Google when BlackBerry decided to get on with the Priv which, as you probably know by now, runs on Android OS.

Posted via CB10

[marcaccioc]

I don't think it is an issue of can't, it is more a matter of won't. They don't want to spend the time, effort and money doing so. On the other hand, here's hoping that it will be updated to at least 4.4 with OS 10.3.3 or 10.3.4 but I wouldn't hold your breath.

[Dazzla]

I'm sure it's more of a case of not wanting to invest. They've drawn their line in the sand. Android or nothing. BB10 just won't have that level of investment unfortunately. Imagine a 10.4 passport with an Android 6.0 runtime! God damn...

[Ment]

When it comes to BB, Google controls Android and Google doesn't want more fragmentation via a runtime that may or may not run an app well. In the balance, promoting fragmentation via runtime on BB10, Sailfish or Tizen really doesn't help Google in any way, they have a hard enough time herding the cats that are the OEMs and carriers to get up to date OS versions.

Essentially BB went to Google to asked for a license and Google said yes but leave that runtime alone.

[AmritD]

They won't. BlackBerry has already stated that they aren't going to update the runtime nor remove it

Z30STA100-2/10.3.2.2876

[conite]

If BlackBerry develops the Runtime, they lose Google Play Services and Apps on the Priv (and any other BlackBerry Android devices).

Even before they had the Priv, Google would not have allowed its apps or services on a forked version of Android anyway. Hence the Priv.

[markmall]

Even before they had the Priv, Google would not have allowed its apps or services on a forked version of Android anyway. Hence the Priv.

What does this mean? They did once, right? Did BlackBerry need permission the first time? What changed? Was it an agreement not to for the Priv's launch?

Posted via CB10

[conite]

What does this mean? They did once, right? Did BlackBerry need permission the first time? What changed? Was it an agreement not to for the Priv's launch?

Posted via CB10

BlackBerry was never allowed to use Google Play Services or Google apps ever. Forked versions of Android (not 100% compatible) cannot.

[markmall]

So when they set up a runtime that was does without permission or legal right?

And then they realized they could not upset Google again when they were doing the Priv?

Is this correct? How do we know this? Google does not own the apps themselves, of course, that run on Android. Maybe some of the code BlackBerry used in the runtime was owned by Google but I don't know.

Maybe Google had monopoly concerns if it stopped BlackBerry.

Posted via CB10

[conite]

So when they set up a runtime that was does without permission or legal right?

And then they realized they could not upset Google again when they were doing the Priv?

Is this correct? How do we know this? Google does not own the apps themselves, of course, that run on Android. Maybe some of the code BlackBerry used in the runtime was owned by Google but I don't know.

Maybe Google had monopoly concerns if it stopped BlackBerry.

Posted via CB10

Android is public domain. Anyone can use it. But if you want Google's apps, you have to submit to the rules of Google - namely a 100% compatible, pure Android device.

The added requirement (after selling a Google-certified device - Priv), you are not allowed to sell another device with a forked version of Android at all.

[oleg mosin]

How about flash android to bb10? Or BlackBerry lock hardware?


Posted via CB10

[markmall]

Android is public domain. Anyone can use it. But if you want Google's apps, you have to submit to the rules of Google - namely a 100% compatible, pure Android device.

The added requirement (after selling a Google-certified device - Priv), you are not allowed to sell another device with a forked version of Android at all.

So if Blackberry didn't sell the Priv then it would not need to submit to these rules?

Yet they don't have to remove the old Android from new BB10 device sales?

This seems very confusing and honestly does not make sense to me. Were they on solid legal ground with their first Android runtime emulation (or whatever it is)?

[conite]

So if Blackberry didn't sell the Priv then it would not need to submit to these rules?

Yet they don't have to remove the old Android from new BB10 device sales?

This seems very confusing and honestly does not make sense to me. Were they on solid legal ground with their first Android runtime emulation (or whatever it is)?

If they did not sell the Priv, they could (if they had any developers left) continue to develop the Runtime, but would still not have access to Google Play Services and Apps made by Google.

If BlackBerry made a new BB10 device, it is likely they would not be able to include an Android Runtime. At the very least, they are not allowed to develop it any further than it is now.

[kvndoom]

So if Blackberry didn't sell the Priv then it would not need to submit to these rules?

Yet they don't have to remove the old Android from new BB10 device sales?

This seems very confusing and honestly does not make sense to me. Were they on solid legal ground with their first Android runtime emulation (or whatever it is)?

The "new" devices are already built and in boxes waiting to be sold. I would assume they're exempt since Passports and Classics were around before the Priv became a reality. BlackBerry would have to disable the runtime via OS update, which would be a horrible thing to do, since it would affect current owners too. Whether there will ever be another BB10 phone built is unknown, but doubtful at this point.

Passport SE, "The BlockBerry" - Cricket Wireless

[thurask]

How about flash android to bb10? Or BlackBerry lock hardware?


Posted via CB10

Hahaha, no.

[Denise in Los Angeles]

So if Blackberry didn't sell the Priv then it would not need to submit to these rules?

Yet they don't have to remove the old Android from new BB10 device sales?

This seems very confusing and honestly does not make sense to me. Were they on solid legal ground with their first Android runtime emulation (or whatever it is)?

Those "new" BB10 phones were manufactured 2 or 3 years ago. I think we should call them "leftover stock of BB10 phones" instead of "new".

[JuiciPatties]

Excuse my ignorance, so can a third party developer update or create a new runtime? Or is that too ingrained into the OS and a developer would not be able to do this?

If possible, I vote for thurask, conite, cobalt and sachesi (and others) to work on it.

[conite]

Excuse my ignorance, so can a third party developer update or create a new runtime? Or is that too ingrained into the OS and a developer would not be able to do this?

If possible, I vote for thurask, conite, cobalt and sachesi (and others) to work on it.

Unfortunately not. All integrated software requires BlackBerry signing keys to install.

[a7medy]

yeah i was just thinking about that . i think in the next version we need to be in the run time with android 7
but it just a dream that will never happen

[Troy Tiscareno]

I've explained this in more detail elsewhere, but I'll try to give a quick summary.

Google makes most of Android available to anyone via the Android Open-Source Project (AOSP). Amazon's FireOS and CyanogenMod are based on AOSP, for example.

But certain pieces of what many consider "Android" are in fact not open-sourced and are Google's property. Those include Google's apps, the Play Store (including its payment functions), and Google Mobile Services (GMS), which is a set of APIs that both make adding powerful features to apps very easy for developers, but also includes things such as Google Authentication and store/in-app payment functions.

Anyone can use AOSP under its license (even though it's open-sourced, there IS a license and certain rules must be followed), but anyone who wants to license GMS and Play Store access must agree, as part of that license, to accept additional restrictions. Relevant here is that they agree that any device they sell (or make for someone else as an OEM) that contains Android code must be fully Google-compliant (and one of the specific restrictions is that the device must boot directly into Android - no dual-booting or hypervisor-type setups are allowed) and must have an approved "powered by Android" logo at bootup.

Prior to BB launching the Priv, they had no license to GMS or Google Play, which means they could not provide out-of-the-box access to Google Play - and even if they did, many apps wouldn't work because they rely on GMS to run, and GMS isn't available to companies who don't license it. User-created "hacks" like Snap or Cobalt's solutions violate those licenses and are technically illegal, and Google could have chosen to cut off access to those devices - they just didn't feel that BB's threat level, among others, warranted doing so.

Now that BB has licensed GMS and Google Play, they are bound by that license, and any device they make going forward that contains Android code must be a full, Google-compliant Android device. BB's license agreement - which is confidential - apparently allowed them to continue to sell their remaining stock of BB10 devices, but prevent BB from making any new ones unless the Android Runtime is stripped out. It also seems to prevent BB from attempting to develop the runtime any further even for existing devices - but they aren't required to remove it from devices made before the license was signed.

BB is still free to make BB10 phones - without the runtime - and they could also deploy any non-Android-based OS, such as WinPhone, without restriction from Google. The license only restricts their use of Android code.

One other piece of the puzzle is that Google moved from the Dalvik-based runtime, which was used through v4.3, to a new, developed-by-Google runtime that's simply called ART (Android RunTime) starting with v4.4. As far as I've been able to find, no one has made an Android runtime for a third-party OS based on anything higher than v4.3 (the Dalvik engine). I don't know if the reason for that is technical, legal/licensing, or just cost/difficulty, but clearly something has stopped that from happening. So, even if BB hadn't licensed GMS and the Play Store, there may have been other issues preventing them from moving beyond v4.3 for the runtime.

[markmall]

Wow. Thanks Troy. Sounds like they did make a big "leap" when they launched Priv. They axed BB10 in a big way it seems.

Posted via CB10

[deadcowboy]

There is a suit against Google and the Android manufacturer's agreement in Europe. Within the next few years, it may be possible for BlackBerry to update the runtime as well as maintain their access to Google services. Heck, maybe even give BB10 Google Services.

Things are going to change, at least in Europe.

[johnny_bravo72]

There is a suit against Google and the Android manufacturer's agreement in Europe. Within the next few years, it may be possible for BlackBerry to update the runtime as well as maintain their access to Google services. Heck, maybe even give BB10 Google Services.

Things are going to change, at least in Europe.

Too late for BB10 by then. It would probably be in OS heaven together with Symbian, WebOS, and BBOS.

*ME173X

[markmall]

Too late for BB10 by then. It would probably be in OS heaven together with Symbian, WebOS, and BBOS.

*ME173X

Assumption.