Quote from Matrixi :

Boris, isn't the great thing about Android that you can change anything you want?

Well judging by this thread, yes i did play with that a lot, but, only cause Android is but ugly by default, most of them, so you practically have to change it to your liking, but only some parts of it/homescreen, the rest of the UI remains ugly.
It's a devils thing that, you never get sattisfied with how it looks, at least i don't, and you keep changing it indefinately.. it's good that everything looks and behaves beautifully from the box for a change.

Quote from Boris Lozac :

Well judging by this thread, yes i did play with that a lot, but, only cause Android is but ugly by default, most of them, so you practically have to change it to your liking, but only some parts of it/homescreen, the rest of the UI remains ugly.
It's a devils thing that, you never get sattisfied with how it looks, at least i don't, and you keep changing it indefinately.. it's good that everything looks and behaves beautifully from the box for a change.

It is up to a taste afterall, windows on mobile looks just plain ugly for me, that does not mean it looks the same to you. Arguing about whichever op system looks nicer on phone is just stupid imo, (/)since it's clear that android looks best of the rest ( /end of joke ). On android one big advantage over the others is that I can actually change pretty much everything, not just only the main screen. Parallels for me pretty much with windows on pc, but hey, It's just me, if you are not satisfied with android, go for something else.

Quote from Matrixi :

TIL closed source browser by a company that is in bed with NSA is a good thing.

Chrome is technically closed source. We can build Chromium, but who knows what is bundled into the actual "Chrome" version that Google distributes.

Same as Android. It's closed source. People can only compile AOSP, but Google can include whatever rootkits or misc technology into the "Google Apps" kit.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Chrome is technically closed source. We can build Chromium, but who knows what is bundled into the actual "Chrome" version that Google distributes.

Same as Android. It's closed source. People can only compile AOSP, but Google can include whatever rootkits or misc technology into the "Google Apps" kit.

That's why the AOSP Browser is king, as the name implies it's fully open source. I'd never infect any device I own with Chrome.

GApps package is optional, it's not mandatory for Android to function. There are open source alternatives available for all the apps that it contains. So, you can have a fully open source Android installation if you wish, I mostly care about my web browser not spying on me at every single step.

Quote from Matrixi :

That's why the AOSP Browser is king, as the name implies it's fully open source. I'd never infect any device I own with Chrome.

GApps package is optional, it's not mandatory for Android to function. There are open source alternatives available for all the apps that it contains. So, you can have a fully open source Android installation if you wish, I mostly care about my web browser not spying on me at every single step.

Well, for it to be "Android" the GApps package is mandatory. Else it is just AOSP. Most people think of "Android" to be the services that the GApps package jackhammers in, not the actual core OS.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Well, for it to be "Android" the GApps package is mandatory. Else it is just AOSP. Most people think of "Android" to be the services that the GApps package jackhammers in, not the actual core OS.

What? That's is complete drivel.

AOSP - Android Open Source Project. Android by definition is nothing more than the operating system itself. First time I've heard anyone say a phone has to have GApps installed to be classified as Android.

\/ You mean Samsung phones, shadowww?

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Same as Android. It's closed source. People can only compile AOSP, but Google can include whatever rootkits or misc technology into the "Google Apps" kit.

Speaking of rootkits
Android phones are doing great at that front
http://redmine.replicant.us/pr ... iki/SamsungGalaxyBackdoor

Quote from Matrixi :

What? That's is complete drivel.

AOSP - Android Open Source Project. Android by definition is nothing more than the operating system itself. First time I've heard anyone say a phone has to have GApps installed to be classified as Android.

\/ You mean Samsung phones, shadowww?

Perhaps this article will make it more clear how AOSP !== Android. It's even worse now because the ****ing home screen isn't even opensource anymore

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets ... e-by-any-means-necessary/

Google is actually trying to make AOSP an unsustainable effort by removing any semblance of updates to the core apps, and instead forking them and only updating them as closed source items.

Quote from E.Reiljans :

Speaking of rootkits
Android phones are doing great at that front
http://redmine.replicant.us/pr ... iki/SamsungGalaxyBackdoor

By definition, Google Apps is actually a rootkit. It hides itself deep in the OS, and has unfettered access to the entire platform to install updates at its will (separate from actual Market updates).

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Perhaps this article will make it more clear how AOSP !== Android. It's even worse now because the ****ing home screen isn't even opensource anymore

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets ... e-by-any-means-necessary/

Google is actually trying to make AOSP an unsustainable effort by removing any semblance of updates to the core apps, and instead forking them and only updating them as closed source items.

I've read that article long ago. It still doesn't support your claim that Android wouldn't be Android without GApps. If your life relies on nothing but Google Play, Now, Gmail or Calendar then sure, Android = GApps. But like I said, there are open source alternatives for each and every one of those apps.

I do agree that Google are making AOSP harder with each update. I'm still grinding my teeth that the AOSP browser moved to the craptastic Chromium WebView in 4.4 from the excellent 4.3 AOSP Browsers WebKit engine.

I'm curious what operating system you would call the new low-end Nokia phones to be running if not Android? It's certainly not AOSP as they don't share the source code for their ROM, and they don't have GApps installed either.

What I'm saying is that what people perceive to be "Android" is not the AOSP components, but the Google Apps components. You give an average user an AOSP only device and ask them to use it, their immediate complaint will be "How do I has Facebook".

That's how the GApps == Android works. To an average end user, given an AOSP device, will find it totally useless.

Nokia/Kindle Fire/etc devices which implement their own Market aren't bare AOSP devices as they do have some sort of market. They're still not really Android how most would perceive them, but they add enough functionality to be able to install Facebook for an average user.

Regardless, I've had this argument a kazillion times in IRC about how AOSP !== Android, and I'm not really prepared to repeat myself again for the kazillionth time.

Alright, I can't agree with you that it's the ease of use for the average person that defines what a device/OS should be called, but I can leave it at that.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Perhaps this article will make it more clear how AOSP !== Android. It's even worse now because the ****ing home screen isn't even opensource anymore

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets ... e-by-any-means-necessary/

Google is actually trying to make AOSP an unsustainable effort by removing any semblance of updates to the core apps, and instead forking them and only updating them as closed source items.

Wow, after reading that article I got an impression that Android ecosystem is a horrible mess. Didn't expected things to be that bad.

Quote from E.Reiljans :

Wow, after reading that article I got an impression that Android ecosystem is a horrible mess. Didn't expected things to be that bad.

OK, I'll bait... why?

Tried something a bit different with Nova launcher.

That pull up half-circle above Gmail just doesn't look right imo..

That's the main app drawer widget, already deleted it and placed the standard apps button to the middle of the dock so it's always there on every home screen. Sadly the landscape mode of Nova seem to be a bit broken, widgets don't scale properly when horizontal.

More Nova launcher testing, bought the full app finally.

Sailfish 1.0.5.16 arrived a few hours ago...

Right, just got myself a shiny new Galaxy Note 3 and it is *beautiful*. Yes, it was a bit of a squeeze getting it through the front door, and getting the flatbed down my road was a nightmare.


I've been using Go Launcher for the past 2 years on my old SGS2, but is there anything better these days that can get things looking awesome without everything being payware?

<3

</3

EDIT: haha, eat my resolution, bitches

Is that a lifesize image of the screen aswell?

can't see, post bigger pictures next time please.

Unfortunately, i see it, i see it very well.