Big Changes at Android Forums

[rootabaga]

Glad to see you got the cert issue resolved; I missed my friends here!
Hope everyone in the US had a safe and happy Independence Day!

 

[ocnbrze]

Glad to see you got the cert issue resolved; I missed my friends here!
Hope everyone in the US had a safe and happy Independence Day!

we were/are discussing this over hear:

something was wrong with Androidforums.com

hey guys, so the past two days my chrome browser has a displayed that the page could not be loaded: this is showing also on my phone as well as my work computer. today i decided to try the edge browser and was surprised that i could log online here. anybody know what is going on with chrome...

androidforums.com

glad to see that you made it back.

 

[mikedt]

Big changes? Is this why AF was offline for a week?

@Rob I honestly thought this site was dead,.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Big changes? Is this why AF was offline for a week?

@Rob I honestly thought this site was dead,.

Look at the date of the original post, there were big changes back in Feb.
This was just bumped because of the certificate issue which isn't really related.

 

[mikedt]

Look at the date of the original post, there were big changes back in Feb.
This was just bumped because of the certificate issue which isn't really related.

I didn't see that. I saw the title in the "New posts* on the AF main page.

I did check on isitdown.com, and it showed this website had been offline for 5 days. So I was thinking the worst.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Yes the site-checkers couldn't connect because of the expired certificate so they showed the site as down. It actually wasn't, but to get in required a few steps in your browser. I didn't realize that either at first and thought the same thing.

 

[mikedt]

Yes the site-checkers couldn't connect because of the expired certificate so they showed the site as down. It actually wasn't, but to get in required a few steps in your browser. I didn't realize that either at first and thought the same thing.

With expired certificates, doesn't that usually show an error message in the browser stating that the site's security certificate has expired? Which has happened on AF before.

 

[Fox Mulder]

With expired certificates, doesn't that usually show an error message in the browser stating that the site's security certificate has expired? Which has happened on AF before.

Yes it does, and that is what happened for many people trying to connect. Others like myself got a "not responding" message until clearing browser data for the site, which then brought up the security error which we could click through.
However the site-checkers do their connection attempts apparently returned nothing with the bad certificate, so to them the site appeared down.

 

[nickdalzell]

Y'all need to install some older browsers that way you would have been able to stay on the site. That's one reason I keep 'em. One of many indeed.

 

[IOWA]

You could've just added an exception too. At least you can on Firefox.

 

[Hadron]

You could've just added an exception too. At least you can on Firefox.

If only Firefox had told me that was the problem (which is odd, because it always has before for other sites with that issue).

Though I think my favourite was the DDG browser on android: blank page, nothing else. No clues, not hint that the browser even reckoned there was a problem, just blank. At least FF told me there was a problem, even if it wouldn't tell me what sort of problem.

 

[rootabaga]

I admire the courage of some to surf the web via an older browser that doesn’t concern itself with modern security. That’s not me; to put it succinctly, I worked in IT far too long and saw too much.

I figured the folks here would get it squared away, and they did. I didn’t mind waiting a bit.

 

[AugieTN]

I admire the courage of some to surf the web via an older browser that doesn’t concern itself with modern security. That’s not me; to put it succinctly, I worked in IT far too long and saw too much.

I figured the folks here would get it squared away, and they did. I didn’t mind waiting a bit.

Years ago I had a Raven Shield and COD game server at a data center. The head geek told me he had just loaded Windows NT on a server and it got hacked before he was able to load the updates.

 

[nickdalzell]

I've had far more data breaches with modern browsers than with the classics. So I stick to what works best for me, which are the classics. I also hate the whole 'flat UI trend' and the classics give me that lovely skeuomorphic depth.

There are forks of older browsers that are still being supported/developed though, such as Pale Moon, MyPal and so on.

Modern browsers idiot proof themselves too much. I've been with computers since the CP/M days. I am far from the moron that all modern software treats me as. I WANT geek, I WANT Linux, I WANT the ability to screw up and take responsibility for any actions I make that are not good.

Honestly Android should have stuck to the 2.x days. That's just my own view, not expected to be shared. I've always been unique like that. At least Android 2.x lives on as a theme/apps on my Z Flip, and at work on two laptops.

Now. I would LOVE to have Android 2.3 on modern hardware. Imagine, 8GB of RAM, 256GB storage, but Android 2.3. There'd be like maybe a week of battery (No Play Services, data gathering, etc) and so many resources you could multitask infinitely! Add in all the lost features I want back such as USB Mass Storage so I can plug into the USB of a Linux machine and it acts like a thumb drive as opposed to it going 'what?' with MTP and we're golden.

The real question is who do I need to pay or convince to develop a custom ROM based on Android 2.3 for a Galaxy Z Flip?

 

[Hadron]

Sounds an expensive proposition, trying to reverse engineer interfaces so that components which have no android 2.3 drivers (i.e. all of them) can be driven by Android 2.3. That's going to take a lot of time and expertise.

Also is it even possible to root a Flip 4 in the US? I know that US Samsungs tend to be very locked down, but don't keep up with individual models.

 

[nickdalzell]

I think it depends on the carrier, and how deep Knox is integrated today. I think as long as you avoid Verizon you're better off. But I'll take anything that can still run Android 2.3, even if it involves buying a Pixel.

 

[Windroid]

But I'll take anything that can still run Android 2.3, even if it involves buying a Pixel.

Are you offering to buy the phone?

 

[nickdalzell]

Depends on how likely I can get Android 2.3 on it. that is my favorite Android version, and having it work on something with VoLTE capability would allow me to have back what I lost the very day carriers cut my old phones off early this year. You can only get so far with themes and a handful of old apps. Each time, the 'modern' flat UI re-asserts itself, from it prompting that it's an app for an older version of Android, to it asking for permissions over and over again, or prompting to acknowledge that I want my music loud despite what it might do to my ears. I want my classic UI back.

Peope sadly think I am nuts though. I got a Nexus 6 lying around, but XDA laughed at me merely asking for a 2.3 ROM for it. So I will likely be stuck with an incomplete feeling the rest of my life, thanks for nothing futurists..

I mention the Pixel since it's the only one capable of running anything from Ubuntu to GrapheneOS, so it is technically possible to backport Android Gingerbread to it, or a fork of it. I mean there's a version of Windows 10 out there thatt looks identical to Windows XP, so even if it has to be a more modern Android build, it might be possible to rip out all the modern UI bits and make it look exactly like Android 2.3, down to the apps, dialogs, icons, status bar, lockscreen, the works..

 

[dave907]

The oldest Android version I'm using is Kitkat.

 

[nickdalzell]

Kitkat was the last gasp of Holo, known as Holo White, which made it look much closer to the later Lollipop. Too 'modern' for myself. Give me the glory of the greens and gloss of Android 2.3, and have USB Mass Storage back. I am not sure what's going on with Linux, but it goes 'whut?' when plugging in a USB-type C phone and relying on MTP, as in nothing happens. It won't mount, or act like you plugged anything in but the phone charges, albeit slowly.

With my HTC Thunderbolt which I was happily using as late as 2020 (don't laugh it was a great phone) it still supported Mass Storage, and showed up as a normal thumbdrive whether it was Linux, Windows or ChromeOS. I've never gotten anything to play well with type-c at all, even charging was unreliable. sorta wish type-c never happened to be honest, but at least we have wireless charging. I just can't upload photos I took with the phone to this PC anymore. So I cannot for example post what I've bought into the 'what is your last purchase' thread, and using the phone to attempt the same was a lesson in frustration and proof that a smartphone will NEVER EVER REPLACE A LAPTOP no matter how many times I hear that it will. I will just keep replaying that scene from the movie RV where Robin Williams was attempting all night long to type up a Word document on a BlackBerry and couldn't send it.

 

[treb1797]

 

[nickdalzell]

This is the scene that keeps replaying in my mind whenever anyone tells me 'smartphones will ultimately replace laptops, tablets and nobody will even need a computer in the future--they'll just use their phone'

That's exacly how it ends up for me, ultimately cumbersome, impractical, inconvenient.

 

[Fox Mulder]

What the heck did you do Rob? An announcement would have been nice.

 

[dave907]

What the heck did you do Rob? An announcement would have been nice.

Yeah

 

[Rob]

What the heck did you do Rob? An announcement would have been nice.

Will try to draft up a very thankful announcement for Thursday