[Troy Tiscareno]

BlackBerry will just provide the VM slot.

Users will download the Android distro. They can just pop a Nexus ROM in there, and inject drivers, if at all necessary ...

Sure... dozens, maybe hundreds of people might do this. How is this going to help sell many additional millions of phones? Normal consumers have zero desire to mod their phones like that - they want to pull a phone out of the box, log in, and click the Download button on their favorite apps and have it work.

This is a solution for hardcore BB enthusiasts (most of the remaining BB10 base are the techie types who are willing to tinker with their phones), but BB needs to grow WAY beyond this core, and they aren't going to do that by shipping an incomplete phone. If BB wants success, it needs a consumer-friendly offering - something that's ready to go out-of-the-box.

[DenverRalphy]

Cyanogen itself is not, as in the cyanogen mod doesn't come with google services by default. OHA doesn't apply to ROMs, but to manufacturers. So if a manufacturer want to use Cyanogenmod, they must apply as a member of OHA; that is the way that the One plus one phone manufacturer went.

The problem with "let users download Google play services" isn't going to bring in a lot of new consumers. Today consumers are though to have access to apps and services out of the box. Doing workarounds to get access to apps doesn't appeal to the average consumer.

Cyanogen is eligible for Google Services as they meet the AOSP compatibility requirements as set by the OHA. They're just not allowed to package the Gapps and Google Services with their OS build simply due to licensing rules (Gapps is proprietary, not open source, and holds a different license). Cyanogen can (and does) provide it's own mirror/distribution of the Gapps package, as the license allows for it. It just doesn't allow for packaging it within their own OS build.

[keithhackneysmullet]

So users would would have to download the runtime from BlackBerry world and then down load apps to run on it from a totally different app store. Yep sounds like BlackBerry.

Posted via CB10

[skibnik]

They have a fork but honestly its built about is as it gets. The who issue we are running into on the current bb10 OS/Android runtime is the lack of services. Cobalt has some ways to help out but that is far from user friendly.

True, thats why the Cyanogen MS partnership intrigues me so much.

Cyanogen teams up with Microsoft to offer bundled apps and services (Update) | Android Central

[anon(9353145)]

Sure... dozens, maybe hundreds of people might do this. How is this going to help sell many additional millions of phones? Normal consumers have zero desire to mod their phones like that - they want to pull a phone out of the box, log in, and click the Download button on their favorite apps and have it work.

This is a solution for hardcore BB enthusiasts (most of the remaining BB10 base are the techie types who are willing to tinker with their phones), but BB needs to grow WAY beyond this core, and they aren't going to do that by shipping an incomplete phone. If BB wants success, it needs a consumer-friendly offering - something that's ready to go out-of-the-box.

Any thoughts on a Samsung Slider with touch capacitive pkb? Hub, actions / shortcuts running Android M, Samsung branded / hardware with full access to the Play Store? I can see that as appealing to a segment within the Android community and offering Samsung an opportunity to sell another form factor for their Galaxy S / Note users who might want to switch things up. The S6 isn't meeting expectations and I suspect part of that is the small bump from the S5. The iPhone 6 / 6+ did gangbuster sales because Apple finally entered phablet territory and there was a huge pent up demand, imho.

There hasn't been much talk from the newly created BlackBerry Technology Solutions division. For the life of me I don't see why this wouldn't be an avenue worth pursuing. Even if Samsung isn't interested, there may be other Android vendors (Lenovo, who prides themselves on their laptop keyboards?) looking to differentiate themselves in an already crowded market. Plus, it leaves BB free to keep the runtime in BB10 and release a low end forked Android device - although why they're pursuing that path is beyond me, lol.

[Soulstream]

True, thats why the Cyanogen MS partnership intrigues me so much.

Cyanogen teams up with Microsoft to offer bundled apps and services (Update) | Android Central

So did Samsung with the galaxy s6 (it came with Onedrive and other microsoft services). As long as google services are also present, Google has nothing against OEMs to bundle other services as well.

The thing that microsoft doesn't have is the app store itself, so as long as Google keeps that there is no way an android device without google's blessing can succeed in the western world.

[skibnik]

So did Samsung with the galaxy s6 (it came with Onedrive and other microsoft services). As long as google services are also present, Google has nothing against OEMs to bundle other services as well.

The thing that microsoft doesn't have is the app store itself, so as long as Google keeps that there is no way an android device without google's blessing can succeed in the western world.

Perhaps, but in theory MS has the money and resources to create an alternative to Google. If they made a serious go at it I think they could succeed.
Cyanogen teams up with Microsoft to offer bundled apps and services (Update) | Android Central
Microsoft's Android and iOS compilers have some interesting code names | Windows Central

[Tre Lawrence]

I'm just not sure a slider will resonate, regardless of the OS.

[Soulstream]

Perhaps, but in theory MS has the money and resources to create an alternative to Google. If they made a serious go at it I think they could succeed.
Cyanogen teams up with Microsoft to offer bundled apps and services (Update) | Android Central
Microsoft's Android and iOS compilers have some interesting code names | Windows Central

True they have money and they have very good services, some even better than Google. But the problem again is the app store. They threw a lot of money at devs for Windows phone and there is still the app gap. I am not sure they are willing to throw that much on cyanogen.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[anon(9353145)]

I'm just not sure a slider will resonate, regardless of the OS.

I think the key selling point is if it's touch capacitive and you can use it as a trackpad and use shortcuts. If it were just a pkb, I'd totally agree. But being able to jump from top to bottom with a keypress *and* the trackpad option, I dunno... You can definitely do both one handed, I know, I do it all the time, lol.

I definitely don't see it upsetting the status quo, but I think it's different enough that it can pull in people who are bored with the status quo... Just my personal opinion, I could be entirely full of it.

EDIT: On the Android side, the Slider with the shortcuts would give any OEM a selling feature over iPhone that they're not likely to match. I don't see Apple ever buying into PKB devices so it's definitely a differentiator.

[Mausje75]

A far more likely scenario is that the Android-powered BlackBerry will be made by Samsung. Thus, it will get all Android features and services. Without them, I see no point in making another forked Android, since there is already one in BB10.

Posted via CB10

Then it is no BlackBerry... But just another Android Samsung.


Posted via my awesome Classic

[Oglon3r]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...-restrictions/

Clause 13;
"Open Devices. The parties will create an open environment for the Devices by making all Android Products and Android Application Programming Interfaces available and open on the Devices and will take no action to limit or restrict the Android platform."

But isn't that what Google is blatantly doing?
I mean sort of like what Microsoft did back then with Internet Browser.
I wonder if Google will ever be challenged as a monopoly in court, just as they did with IE.
Because if Google continues with this trend the concept of a free and open android is dead.

Posted via CB10

[Prem WatsApp]

Isn't that morally wrong? Anyway Cyanogen is eligible for Google Services anyway.

Needs prayerful consideration whether that's ok, I guess... :-)

We might look at it that way: it's like preloading a PC with Virtual Box (open source!), and the users (not the OEM) can then decide which other secondary OS(es) they would like to run on it. Decision which OS and whether at all remains with the user.

As mentioned above, problem is the OOTB experience (out-of-the-box) that most users expect and are accustomed to. Whether BlackBerry would be allowed to suggest download links to installable ROMs (provided by others or BBRY themselves?) during the setup process or later is a legal question we better leave to the lawyers and legal departments...

As long as there is no stealing involved, ROMs are freely available to download & use and BBRY just provides the VM container, I believe it would be ok...

:-D

Great discussion, btw!

�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[Prem WatsApp]

Sure... dozens, maybe hundreds of people might do this. How is this going to help sell many additional millions of phones? Normal consumers have zero desire to mod their phones like that - they want to pull a phone out of the box, log in, and click the Download button on their favorite apps and have it work.

This is a solution for hardcore BB enthusiasts (most of the remaining BB10 base are the techie types who are willing to tinker with their phones), but BB needs to grow WAY beyond this core, and they aren't going to do that by shipping an incomplete phone. If BB wants success, it needs a consumer-friendly offering - something that's ready to go out-of-the-box.

Understood...

Yeah, with Snap and Cobalt we're pretty much doing it already, hey... ;-)

OOBE dilemma...
:-(

(that's a Microsoft term, normally know as OOTBE, haha!)

�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[twiggyrj]

I'm just not sure a slider will resonate, regardless of the OS.

It will be a compromise of the PKB and full touch form factors and will be a niche device with or without Android. If it is like my friends old torch in the keyboard department it won't full please the pkb fans and if its too bulky then the full touch fans won't be pleased either.

[twiggyrj]

Needs prayerful consideration whether that's ok, I guess... :-)

We might look at it that way: it's like preloading a PC with Virtual Box (open source!), and the users (not the OEM) can then decide which other secondary OS(es) they would like to run on it. Decision which OS and whether at all remains with the user.

As mentioned above, problem is the OOTB experience (out-of-the-box) that most users expect and are accustomed to. Whether BlackBerry would be allowed to suggest download links to installable ROMs (provided by others or BBRY themselves?) during the setup process or later is a legal question we better leave to the lawyers and legal departments...

As long as there is no stealing involved, ROMs are freely available to download & use and BBRY just provides the VM container, I believe it would be ok...

:-D

Great discussion, btw!

�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

Yeah that could work such as allowing someone to download a cyanogen ROM maybe BlackBerry should partner with ROM communities to get their blessing for using their ROMS in such a way? May even get a little support from them even.

[Ziffster]

New Android OEM licensing terms leak; ?Open? comes with a lot of restrictions | Ars Technica

Clause 13;
"Open Devices. The parties will create an open environment for the Devices by making all Android Products and Android Application Programming Interfaces available and open on the Devices and will take no action to limit or restrict the Android platform."

But isn't that what Google is blatantly doing?
I mean sort of like what Microsoft did back then with Internet Browser.
I wonder if Google will ever be challenged as a monopoly in court, just as they did with IE.
Because if Google continues with this trend the concept of a free and open android is dead.

Posted via CB10

Sadly all too true... what saves Google is that they are not in the position of being a monopoly so governments are unlikely to get involved. Google needs Apple and vice versa. As long as there are two players don't expect actions like were taken against Microsoft and IE. It was the fact Microsoft was effectively a monopoly which allowed action to be taken.

Face it, open and free Android died the day Google became the official app repository. Look back at comments made at the time by many insiders - they all predicted the death of Android as a free spirit.

[Bla1ze]

Cyanogen is eligible for Google Services as they meet the AOSP compatibility requirements as set by the OHA. They're just not allowed to package the Gapps and Google Services with their OS build simply due to licensing rules (Gapps is proprietary, not open source, and holds a different license). Cyanogen can (and does) provide it's own mirror/distribution of the Gapps package, as the license allows for it. It just doesn't allow for packaging it within their own OS build.

Yep, Cyanogen is CTS certified. The Android Runtime for BlackBerry will never reach that.

[yessuz]

I have a dream....





Cyanogen for passport

CB10 on PP SE in UK on 3

[Ziffster]

As I posted elsewhere, OHA is in many regards a dinosaur. Googles own actions are likely in violation of OHA and extensions such Samsungs Knoxx (since Knoxx is closed source and components of the code run at the kernal level) awould also appear to be in violation. The Priv itself is also technically in violation of OHA requirements by the fact it runs on a hardened Linux kernal and not the standard Android kernal - in other words it is a fork.


I suspect that Google received something else in exchange for Google Play access rather than Blackberry necessarily being forced to join the OHA.... perhaps something like a cross licensing agreement since if I am not mistaken Google was accused by BB of a number of patent infringements. There is also the recent announcement by QNX that there auto infotainment system will support the current Android Runtime which would be a violation of OHA (since QNX is a Blackberry Division) if forced to join, but with over 50% of the Auto Infotainment market (a market Google wants into) Google may have not wanted to force Blackberry to pull the Android runtime out of QNXAuto.

I am a little surprised that Blackberry didn't use QNX as the kernal for there Android platform since it would have leveraged QNXAuto efforts rathering than having to support two Android runtimes - one on QNX and one on Linux. It would also have opened the door (and I know many readers here will shot me for saying this) to possibly offering a migration path for BB10 devices to BB11 (Android Runtime on QNX - without support for BB10 apps).

[Ronindan]

actually it is the other way around. with bb being a OHA vendor, BB will be now obligated to drop Android run time altogether. which can account for the fact that android run time updates has slowed to crawl.

[joeldf]

actually it is the other way around. with bb being a OHA vendor, BB will be now obligated to drop Android run time altogether. which can account for the fact that android run time updates has slowed to crawl.

Android runtime updates in BB10 have totally stopped already. They are apparently allowed to continue with what they already created - Android 4.3 runtime (Jelly Bean) - and "update" that as needed. But they can't update the major version number beyond that. In other words... no 4.4 KitKat or newer on what's left of BB10.

[Ziffster]

Android runtime updates in BB10 have totally stopped already. They are apparently allowed to continue with what they already created - Android 4.3 runtime (Jelly Bean) - and "update" that as needed. But they can't update the major version number beyond that. In other words... no 4.4 KitKat or newer on what's left of BB10.

How is Blackberry's QNX division getting around this (neither Blackberry or Google has confirmed whether or not Blackberry has joined the OHA)?

Blackberry has updated the Android runtime which is bundled with QNXAuto to 5 with plans to move to support for 6 so why not BB10 (not that it makes sense for other reasons). I doubt the OHA has anything to do with the lack of development, just pure market forces, with less than 0.5% market share, and that market limited mostly to corporate and government accounts which restrict the use of any third party apps anyway, it just makes very little market sense to put the money into an updated runtime. BB is no longer large enough to afford the cost of development for the Android kernal when for those users who want full Android for much less they can offer a 'native' android device with OS development costs funded by others.

[Ment]

How is Blackberry's QNX division getting around this (neither Blackberry or Google has confirmed whether or not Blackberry has joined the OHA)?

Blackberry has updated the Android runtime which is bundled with QNXAuto to 5 with plans to move to support for 6 so why not BB10 (not that it makes sense for other reasons). I doubt the OHA has anything to do with the lack of development, just pure market forces, with less than 0.5% market share, and that market limited mostly to corporate and government accounts which restrict the use of any third party apps anyway, it just makes very little market sense to put the money into an updated runtime. BB is no longer large enough to afford the cost of development for the Android kernal when for those users who want full Android for much less they can offer a 'native' android device with OS development costs funded by others.

Where are you seeing that QNX Auto 1) Has an android runtime and 2) that its Lollipop. Even if its true thats not the issue. Google has total discretion in certification/licensing for its proprietary Android apps.

[Troy Tiscareno]

QNX For Cars definitely does NOT have an Android runtime. At all. It will host Android Auto (which was specifically designed to run on QNX, Linux, and Windows), but that is essentially an app, not an OS.

Apple's Car Play is similarly an app, and can also run on top of QNX and other embedded OSs.

None of that has anything directly to do with the Android OS, except that Android Auto is a slightly more sophisticated method of remotely accessing and controlling your phone. It isn't much more than screen mirroring, all the apps run on the phone itself and the car just displays the screen and allows control input to be passed on to the phone.

I'm not sure why some folks imagine that they're going to figure out a way around Google's rules that Google's lawyers didn't foresee (with help from their engineers).

Posted via the CrackBerry App for Android