My first year with android.

[thekingsteven]

My point to that was it was a bad introduction to android. I was like 17 at the time and had no interest in tech at all.... But yeah...

 

[EarlyMon]

Honestly my point was to babble while looking for something to watch on TV while slacking off.

Nothing intended by my remarks.

 

[thekingsteven]

Honestly my point was to babble while looking for something to watch on TV while slacking off.

Nothing intended by my remarks.

I'm supposed to be stocking but I'm taking smoke breaks and slacking off!

 

[nickdalzell]

My first few devices gave me a bad opinion of Android as well, but i will state that the early versions (Cupcake through Gingerbread) sucked overall. that was before memory management was perfected, before the advent of TRIM and Project Butter, and the limits caused by apps2SD (built-in at the time, could slow things down with a class 4 MicroSD card), as well as the bad partitoning used at the time.

My experience with Android Jelly Bean (Samsung Galaxy SIII) was vastly different. The UI was much improved (not TouchWiz, the general UI) and there were many improvements to speed and memory management. I also had some cheaper devices running Jelly Bean that worked quite well and had non-skinned stock UIs, but the 'tron blue' wasn't really good for my eyes, overall the UI though was improved tons from the early days, which seemed too intent to copy iOS in a hideously ugly manner--including the cheesy lockscreen, clock font, status/notification bar, etc.

Android 2.2 'FroYo' lockscreen

Android 4.2 'Jelly Bean' lockscreen

Android 2.2 'FroYo' Home Screen

Android 4.1 'Jelly Bean' Home screen

 

[funkylogik]

Wow that froyo search widget (edit and the homescreen icons) is just dripping in that skeumorphism (can't spell lol) thing you love mate

 

[nickdalzell]

Yes, it was 'skeuomorphic' (actually, it was 3D, skeuomorphism = replicating a real-life object, such as a virtual tape player, which the Google widget did not do) but it was also 'cartoony'.

Earlier versions seemed to take 3D too far, while TouchWiz for example (and even stock JB if you look at the icons for phone, internet, and camera) modernized it a bit.

Even if the UI looked good, it was unreliable, crashed often, and lagged, even on flagships. the notification icons were terrible.

TouchWiz on the S4 and Note 3 still tend to use Gingerbread-era design, so i get the 3D all i like, but with the reliable and faster nature of Jelly Bean/KitKat. If i wanted though, i could still get that FroYo era Google search by installing 'AOSP Search' from Play Store. i do wish i could replace Play Store with the Android Market, which works on old devices, but Play Store self-updates and i cannot stop that, or revert to the Market app, but i can delete it entirely and use an alternative.

To be honest, i did like the old Google Apps back when Play Store first came out. the original Play Books, original Play Music had nice UI to them. they were sorta like updated AOSP versions. when they went to the white flat look and then their always-persistent (chewing through resources all the time which if you use other apps causes needless OOM issues and launcher redraws) Material themed look i lost interest.

 

[funkylogik]

I remember, on my first Android phone (Zte Blade), it had so little storage we used to freeze/uninstall an app that was responsible for updating the market (ultimately to play store), is that still a part of Android?

 

[nickdalzell]

Root is required to freeze an app, but even then you're stuck with the factory-installed Play Store, which is the white crap looking one. There seems to be no way to use the old Android Market or first Play Store on KitKat, and it self-updates unless you use an unpopular app that is gone from Play Store now. uninstalling updates will bring the look back for a time, but it quickly updates in the background.

I can't in other words revive the first iteration of Google apps on a Kitkat device. the oldest it has is the 2nd era of Play apps, with the white flat look. I've already got alternatives i'm happy with, but i would also like the oldest Play Books back. it conforms to the TouchWiz UI and had a neat library view with 3D books, i'd love to have that one back. see, skeuomorphism wasn't killed in Jelly Bean.

 

[funkylogik]

Lol
Is the Steve Coogan book any good mate?

 

[nickdalzell]

never read it, it was an image i picked from Google Images as an example. another benefit then was i think the Play Books app didn't depend on Play Services. there was an old iteration of Google+ that has since ceased to work though. Back then i actually enjoyed the apps. they took half the RAM, didn't continue to run once exited, and looked very nice. Maps, Play Books, Play Store, Play Music all were forward thinking then. now, they appear to copy 1970s print ads, like the playlists view in the brand new Play Music app.

I really miss the little Andy poses in Play Store:

 

[EarlyMon]

My first few devices gave me a bad opinion of Android as well, but i will state that the early versions (Cupcake through Gingerbread) sucked overall because I kept using a brand of phone that wasn't that great. Here are some Samsung screens that I'll just identify as Android as if that's all there was to it.

Ftfy.

 

[nickdalzell]

Actually, Early, early versions of Android were not nearly as good then on the flagships of the time as the more current versions are on today's flagships. Android wasn't quite there until 4.0.

 

[nickdalzell]

Why does the new auto-playlist view:

Remind me of 1970s brochures?

 

[Slug]

Actually, Early, early versions of Android were not nearly as good then on the flagships of the time as the more current versions are on today's flagships.

Rubbish! My Galaxy S2 (the flagship of the range at the time) shipped with v2.3.5 and performed like a dream. Come to think about it, my Desire Z had v2.2 and was also flawless.

Unless by "not nearly as good" you mean "not as mature/fully-featured", which stands to reason as Android back then was a much younger product.

 

[EarlyMon]

Actually, Early, early versions of Android were not nearly as good then on the flagships of the time as the more current versions are on today's flagships. Android wasn't quite there until 4.0.

Actually, the biggest things in 4.0 that made it a hit and credited by most of you to Google weren't from Google at all.

quick settings in the pull-down, Android 4 was in Sense Gingerbread,

people-centric vs app-centric operations first appearing in 4 was in Sense Eclair,

and later things like individual profiles was also in Sense Eclair,

Samsung just filed a patent for home screen and profile saving this month - also present since Sense 1.0 in 2010.

And yet the blogosphere tech writers bleated like sheep that it was all bloat - until either Google or Samsung invented it and then omgz pwnies how great it was.

3D launcher? Sense 3.

Unified app appearance with a common design language? Sense 3 SDK.

The Nexus line was designed as a developer phone and has never been the big seller.

HTC, Sony and Motorola have absolutely swamped Google and Samsung in innovative features for years.

Please don't presume to tell me what flagships did what, when or how - I've used most of them (meaning living with them as they appeared for more than a week) and I have no illusions about shortcomings.

Neither am I brand-blinded to what came when.

^ And that matters because the choices were there.

That stupid lockscreen you identify as up through Froyo I haven't had to look at since Donut, for me, was gone well over a year earlier before you saw a new one.

You choose your brand, you're happy with it, great, I couldn't be happier for you.

But your view of what was available when by using "Android" as a catch all is so far off it's not even wrong.

Samsung never grew to dominance by TouchWiz or anything else except for two simple factors -

SD card and removable battery when everyone else abandoned it.

As those features return to other brands, Samsung share has been going down, back to the healthier distribution across brands - inviting the innovation through competition that made the Android family great in the first place.

 

[mikedt]

Lol
Is the Steve Coogan book any good mate?

I saw Steve Coogan in an in-flight movie last summer on Aeroflot, Moscow to Beijing.

Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa. It was quite funny.

 

[Gmash]

Gingerbread and even Froyo were pretty good for me. Actually, Gingerbread is my favorite version of Android, as that was the tipping point from when Google was still adding functionality instead of taking it away "for our own good". (think USB mass storage, app2sd,) full control of SD card lasted a bit longer, but the trend to less functionality and less intuitive interface (gestures instead of buttons for example) started after Gingerbread.

 

[nickdalzell]

Gingerbread was the best of the old versions, but no one can tell me that RAM management was as well optimized in Donut or Eclair as it is now since Android Ice Cream Sandwich. At least Gingerbread ditched that hideous status bar used in 2.1 and earlier and had a better lockscreen.

As for screenshots, they were from stock Android, not skinned devices as a lot of issues can also be blamed on skins.

IMO i, too hate the overreliance on gestures and prefer buttons, too. Me thinks Google is trying to make Android appeal to a different target demographic, in much the same way Apple did when releasing iOS 7? I have no idea. the younger set seem to love it...kinda like the reboot of Battlestar Galactica. I and those who grew up with the original 1978 series hated the reboot, but it was a success because the younger majority who felt the original one 'campy' or never saw it at all were the intended target for the reboot.

Android 'Lollipop' is a reboot of Android as well as yet another example of 'dumbing down for the masses'. sadly those alienated by it or opposed are simply disregarded as a 'minority who hates change' or 'we'll get used to it' or even told to 'make your own interface or OS if you want it your way'

 

[mikedt]

 

[funkylogik]

So, Nick, just how old are you, bro??

 

[mikedt]

Neh!!! ...it's not like the old days!!

Besides the original Battlestar Galactica with Lorne Greene, I used to like Six Million Dollar Man when I was young.... I watched some of it again recently, just seems horribly dated now and shows its 1970s era.

 

[nickdalzell]

I'm 35 years old. but seeing UI regress back to the 2D days again leaves me feeling behind a generation.

FYI it's not just Galactica, even Star Trek's reboot isn't well liked by the very people who made it a hit since 1969. most of the new crap is made for teens. lust, sex, etc. not child friendly. Into Darkness was quite violent for Trek! It's ironic you mention dated 1970s look, seeing as the once futuristic 3-dimensional interface is now falling in favor of a regression to 1970s print ad look these days. wasn't flat and 2D obsolete when Super VGA monitors went out of style?

 

[EarlyMon]

Yeah well, Babylon 5 being available on a phone was a hot topic on the most active phone forum here when Flash became available.

Pardon me for mentioning a personal preference, glad it's been taken right out of context as a new launching point for another thread derailing.

Well played.

Moving this to the Lounge.

Everyone wants to play that way, including staff - let's do this.

 

[thekingsteven]

I feel so behind! I've only known gingerbread and KitKat (soon to be lollipop) I wounder If could look up the stock android home and lock screens? Wall done got me curious now!

 

[thekingsteven]

Yeah well, Babylon 5 being available on a phone was a hot topic on the most active phone forum here when Flash became available.

Pardon me for mentioning a personal preference, glad it's been taken right out of context as a new launching point for another thread derailing.

Well played.

Moving this to the Lounge.

Everyone wants to play that way, including staff - let's do this.

I started this thread hoping others would also share there experience with android. As well as discover new stuff about android.