Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard to
do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
insights at all?
If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
everything on the site).
This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate
roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but
be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is
very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
- Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security
model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require
trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an
encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
- Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD
cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the
user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have
it work.
- Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install
an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card
storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level
file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and
settings and installer app UIs.
On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard to
> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
> insights at all?
> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
> everything on the site).
-There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
-Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within seconds or the entire phone would crash).
-There are a lot of open issues around app management in general: *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the situation is a bit messy. *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend on whether the SD card is inserted. * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
-And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head, which is sure to be incomplete.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
> - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
> - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have > it work.
> - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
> So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and > settings and installer app UIs.
> On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard to >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any >> insights at all?
>> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading >> everything on the site).
The fact that the running of apps off the sd card is difficult to
implement is very understandable, but why release a first Android
showcase device with such limited internal application storage space
if this is the case? I mean, of course it was going to be a problem
and this should have been spotted a mile away. I have spent way too
much time over the years managing storage space on my former WinMo
devices for this to be any fun and am very disappointed in this aspect
of the G1. Good luck implementing it.
On Nov 6, 9:42 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> -There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that
> are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a
> situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to
> disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in
> RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the
> data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
> -Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the
> installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have
> to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any
> time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within
> seconds or the entire phone would crash).
> -There are a lot of open issues around app management in general:
> *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs
> that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the
> situation is a bit messy.
> *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types
> are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps
> that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether
> the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend
> on whether the SD card is inserted.
> * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the
> possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA
> like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
> -And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head,
> which is sure to be incomplete.
> JBQ
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate
> > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but
> > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is
> > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
> > - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security
> > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require
> > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an
> > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
> > - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD
> > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the
> > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have
> > it work.
> > - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install
> > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card
> > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
> > So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level
> > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and
> > settings and installer app UIs.
> > On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
> >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
> >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard to
> >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
> >> insights at all?
> >> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
> >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
> >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
> >> everything on the site).
I feel the same way. I think this feature should definitely be pushed
up the roadmap. Two features that will definitely make android more
usable are the virtual keyboard and the ability to install apps on SD
cards. I hope project leads feel the same way and bump this up on the
roadmap. It will become a VERY big problem.
1) when paid applications are available and no one is able to download
anything due to limited memory. Will people also delete applications
and need to repay just to redownload? No one will have memory to try
any applications out.
2) Games coming out will also cost too much memory. Look at all the
good games on the Iphone. They are all 10 megs +.
3) The Market, Email, Browser applications will continue to grow and
take up more and more memory. The market application is the worse
since there is no way to clear it and it keeps on growing and growing.
On Nov 15, 1:20 pm, DiscoDapper <Adrian.Cul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The fact that the running of apps off the sd card is difficult to
> implement is very understandable, but why release a first Android
> showcase device with such limited internal application storage space
> if this is the case? I mean, of course it was going to be a problem
> and this should have been spotted a mile away. I have spent way too
> much time over the years managing storage space on my former WinMo
> devices for this to be any fun and am very disappointed in this aspect
> of the G1. Good luck implementing it.
> On Nov 6, 9:42 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> > I'll add a few bits of information here:
> > -There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that
> > are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a
> > situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to
> > disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in
> > RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the
> > data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
> > -Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the
> > installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have
> > to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any
> > time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within
> > seconds or the entire phone would crash).
> > -There are a lot of open issues around app management in general:
> > *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs
> > that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the
> > situation is a bit messy.
> > *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types
> > are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps
> > that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether
> > the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend
> > on whether the SD card is inserted.
> > * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the
> > possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA
> > like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
> > -And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head,
> > which is sure to be incomplete.
> > JBQ
> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate
> > > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but
> > > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is
> > > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
> > > - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security
> > > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require
> > > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an
> > > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
> > > - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD
> > > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the
> > > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have
> > > it work.
> > > - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install
> > > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card
> > > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
> > > So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level
> > > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and
> > > settings and installer app UIs.
> > > On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
> > >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
> > >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard to
> > >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
> > >> insights at all?
> > >> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
> > >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
> > >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
> > >> everything on the site).
This isn't as much an issue of roadmap as an issue of actually implementing all the relevant components. Saying "we'd like it implemented tomorrow" doesn't mean that it can be implemented in a day, even if it's made the top priority for all the people involved. Some things take time. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, there are still some open design questions, which means that we're not yet at a point where we can have a good idea about how long the implementation will take, and therefore putting it on a roadmap would be premature at this point.
It's obviously one of the pain points with the G1, it's likely to be a pain point with other devices, and it is important that Android eventually provide some platform-level solution for this situation. It has to be balanced against all the other high-priority tasks that the Android engineering community is working on.
You can help, though, even without writing code, by taking part in the discussions about the various design decisions. The more brains we have thinking about the design, the faster it'll be possible to start an implementation, and the fewer surprises we'll have during and after the implementation.
> I feel the same way. I think this feature should definitely be pushed > up the roadmap. Two features that will definitely make android more > usable are the virtual keyboard and the ability to install apps on SD > cards. I hope project leads feel the same way and bump this up on the > roadmap. It will become a VERY big problem.
> 1) when paid applications are available and no one is able to download > anything due to limited memory. Will people also delete applications > and need to repay just to redownload? No one will have memory to try > any applications out. > 2) Games coming out will also cost too much memory. Look at all the > good games on the Iphone. They are all 10 megs +. > 3) The Market, Email, Browser applications will continue to grow and > take up more and more memory. The market application is the worse > since there is no way to clear it and it keeps on growing and growing.
> On Nov 15, 1:20 pm, DiscoDapper <Adrian.Cul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The fact that the running of apps off the sd card is difficult to >> implement is very understandable, but why release a first Android >> showcase device with such limited internal application storage space >> if this is the case? I mean, of course it was going to be a problem >> and this should have been spotted a mile away. I have spent way too >> much time over the years managing storage space on my former WinMo >> devices for this to be any fun and am very disappointed in this aspect >> of the G1. Good luck implementing it.
>> On Nov 6, 9:42 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
>> > I'll add a few bits of information here:
>> > -There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that >> > are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a >> > situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to >> > disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in >> > RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the >> > data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
>> > -Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the >> > installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have >> > to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any >> > time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within >> > seconds or the entire phone would crash).
>> > -There are a lot of open issues around app management in general: >> > *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs >> > that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the >> > situation is a bit messy. >> > *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types >> > are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps >> > that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether >> > the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend >> > on whether the SD card is inserted. >> > * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the >> > possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA >> > like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
>> > -And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head, >> > which is sure to be incomplete.
>> > JBQ
>> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate >> > > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but >> > > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is >> > > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
>> > > - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security >> > > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require >> > > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an >> > > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
>> > > - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD >> > > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the >> > > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have >> > > it work.
>> > > - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install >> > > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card >> > > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
>> > > So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level >> > > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and >> > > settings and installer app UIs.
>> > > On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the >> > >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation >> > >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard >> > >> to >> > >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any >> > >> insights at all?
>> > >> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would >> > >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still >> > >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading >> > >> everything on the site).
Why don't the Android team implement and allow the apks on the SDcard
to run like as a "portable application" without even installing at
all?
i.e. just like portable firefox, thunderbird, etc that can be run on a
PC on a USB stick without any installation.
This feature would be very useful for large or seldom used
applications like games which can be swapped and played on a different
Android phones, or stored/archived away on the SDcard without affect
the phone memory.
> This isn't as much an issue of roadmap as an issue of actually
> implementing all the relevant components. Saying "we'd like it
> implemented tomorrow" doesn't mean that it can be implemented in a
> day, even if it's made the top priority for all the people involved.
> Some things take time. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, there are
> still some open design questions, which means that we're not yet at a
> point where we can have a good idea about how long the implementation
> will take, and therefore putting it on a roadmap would be premature at
> this point.
> It's obviously one of the pain points with the G1, it's likely to be a
> pain point with other devices, and it is important that Android
> eventually provide some platform-level solution for this situation. It
> has to be balanced against all the other high-priority tasks that the
> Android engineering community is working on.
> You can help, though, even without writing code, by taking part in the
> discussions about the various design decisions. The more brains we
> have thinking about the design, the faster it'll be possible to start
> an implementation, and the fewer surprises we'll have during and after
> the implementation.
> > I feel the same way. I think this feature should definitely be pushed
> > up the roadmap. Two features that will definitely make android more
> > usable are the virtual keyboard and the ability to install apps on SD
> > cards. I hope project leads feel the same way and bump this up on the
> > roadmap. It will become a VERY big problem.
> > 1) when paid applications are available and no one is able to download
> > anything due to limited memory. Will people also delete applications
> > and need to repay just to redownload? No one will have memory to try
> > any applications out.
> > 2) Games coming out will also cost too much memory. Look at all the
> > good games on the Iphone. They are all 10 megs +.
> > 3) The Market, Email, Browser applications will continue to grow and
> > take up more and more memory. The market application is the worse
> > since there is no way to clear it and it keeps on growing and growing.
> > On Nov 15, 1:20 pm, DiscoDapper <Adrian.Cul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The fact that the running of apps off the sd card is difficult to
> >> implement is very understandable, but why release a first Android
> >> showcase device with such limited internal application storage space
> >> if this is the case? I mean, of course it was going to be a problem
> >> and this should have been spotted a mile away. I have spent way too
> >> much time over the years managing storage space on my former WinMo
> >> devices for this to be any fun and am very disappointed in this aspect
> >> of the G1. Good luck implementing it.
> >> On Nov 6, 9:42 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> >> > I'll add a few bits of information here:
> >> > -There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that
> >> > are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a
> >> > situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to
> >> > disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in
> >> > RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the
> >> > data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
> >> > -Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the
> >> > installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have
> >> > to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any
> >> > time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within
> >> > seconds or the entire phone would crash).
> >> > -There are a lot of open issues around app management in general:
> >> > *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs
> >> > that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the
> >> > situation is a bit messy.
> >> > *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types
> >> > are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps
> >> > that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether
> >> > the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend
> >> > on whether the SD card is inserted.
> >> > * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the
> >> > possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA
> >> > like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
> >> > -And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head,
> >> > which is sure to be incomplete.
> >> > JBQ
> >> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate
> >> > > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but
> >> > > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is
> >> > > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
> >> > > - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security
> >> > > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require
> >> > > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an
> >> > > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
> >> > > - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD
> >> > > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the
> >> > > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have
> >> > > it work.
> >> > > - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install
> >> > > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card
> >> > > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
> >> > > So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level
> >> > > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and
> >> > > settings and installer app UIs.
> >> > > On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
> >> > >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
> >> > >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard
> >> > >> to
> >> > >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
> >> > >> insights at all?
> >> > >> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
> >> > >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
> >> > >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
> >> > >> everything on the site).
I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
however tell you what you already know:
I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
issue.
I am not saying that it can be implemented in a day or week or month
but I am just hoping that it will be placed on the roadmap as a high
priority item so more resources are put into it. I know how
challenging it can be, but I am just hoping to see it implemented in
the foreseeable feature, not 1 or 2 years later.
On Nov 16, 4:05 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> This isn't as much an issue of roadmap as an issue of actually
> implementing all the relevant components. Saying "we'd like it
> implemented tomorrow" doesn't mean that it can be implemented in a
> day, even if it's made the top priority for all the people involved.
> Some things take time. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, there are
> still some open design questions, which means that we're not yet at a
> point where we can have a good idea about how long the implementation
> will take, and therefore putting it on a roadmap would be premature at
> this point.
> It's obviously one of the pain points with the G1, it's likely to be a
> pain point with other devices, and it is important that Android
> eventually provide some platform-level solution for this situation. It
> has to be balanced against all the other high-priority tasks that the
> Android engineering community is working on.
> You can help, though, even without writing code, by taking part in the
> discussions about the various design decisions. The more brains we
> have thinking about the design, the faster it'll be possible to start
> an implementation, and the fewer surprises we'll have during and after
> the implementation.
> > I feel the same way. I think this feature should definitely be pushed
> > up the roadmap. Two features that will definitely make android more
> > usable are the virtual keyboard and the ability to install apps on SD
> > cards. I hope project leads feel the same way and bump this up on the
> > roadmap. It will become a VERY big problem.
> > 1) when paid applications are available and no one is able to download
> > anything due to limited memory. Will people also delete applications
> > and need to repay just to redownload? No one will have memory to try
> > any applications out.
> > 2) Games coming out will also cost too much memory. Look at all the
> > good games on the Iphone. They are all 10 megs +.
> > 3) The Market, Email, Browser applications will continue to grow and
> > take up more and more memory. The market application is the worse
> > since there is no way to clear it and it keeps on growing and growing.
> > On Nov 15, 1:20 pm, DiscoDapper <Adrian.Cul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The fact that the running of apps off the sd card is difficult to
> >> implement is very understandable, but why release a first Android
> >> showcase device with such limited internal application storage space
> >> if this is the case? I mean, of course it was going to be a problem
> >> and this should have been spotted a mile away. I have spent way too
> >> much time over the years managing storage space on my former WinMo
> >> devices for this to be any fun and am very disappointed in this aspect
> >> of the G1. Good luck implementing it.
> >> On Nov 6, 9:42 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> >> > I'll add a few bits of information here:
> >> > -There are obvious problems for the apps installed on the SD card that
> >> > are currently running when the SD card is removed: in such a
> >> > situation, they can't possibly rely on being able to save any state to
> >> > disk: the code that would be used to save data might simply not be in
> >> > RAM (and even if the code is there, the logical location to save the
> >> > data would be the SD card itself, which would be gone).
> >> > -Several aspects of the system itself open application files (the
> >> > installer, the system server, just to name a few), and therefore have
> >> > to be prepared for the fact that those files might disappear at any
> >> > time (and that the file descriptors would have to be closed within
> >> > seconds or the entire phone would crash).
> >> > -There are a lot of open issues around app management in general:
> >> > *if the user installs an app on the SD card, pulls the card, installs
> >> > that same app on the internal flash, and puts the SD card back in, the
> >> > situation is a bit messy.
> >> > *if an app queries the list of installed apps (to know what file types
> >> > are handled), a decision has to be made whether it can see the apps
> >> > that were installed on the SD card. The result might depend on whether
> >> > the querying app is on removable storage itself. It might also depend
> >> > on whether the SD card is inserted.
> >> > * also, things become more interesting if you start to consider the
> >> > possibility that there might be multiple removable slots (I have a PDA
> >> > like that), or if you think of how it impacts legacy apps.
> >> > -And that's just a quick list of a few ideas going through my head,
> >> > which is sure to be incomplete.
> >> > JBQ
> >> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, hackbod <hack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > This is something we want to do, but it is not on the immediate
> >> > > roadmap. If you want to talk about how to implement it, we can, but
> >> > > be aware that actually doing a production quality implementation is
> >> > > very non-trivial. Some things that would need to be addressed:
> >> > > - Security on the SD card, so that apps there don't break the security
> >> > > model. (The SD card needs to be a FAT filesystem so this will require
> >> > > trickery of some sort, we are currently looking at putting an
> >> > > encrypted file system inside a file on the sd card.)
> >> > > - Dealing with SD cards being removed and inserted, and switching SD
> >> > > cards. This also needs to work with a paid marketplace, where the
> >> > > user can't just copy an application from one phone to another and have
> >> > > it work.
> >> > > - Management of storage, allowing the user to decide where to install
> >> > > an app, and probably moving apps between internal and sd card
> >> > > storage. Key is providing a really simple, intuitive UI.
> >> > > So this requires significant work across the entire stack: low-level
> >> > > file systems in the kernel, framework application management, and
> >> > > settings and installer app UIs.
> >> > > On Nov 4, 2:24 pm, Arron <arro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> Looking at the roadmap, I do not see this being addressed in the
> >> > >> foreseeable future or ever at all. I think it's a big limitation
> >> > >> since I am so conscious of memory right now on my G1 that it's hard
> >> > >> to
> >> > >> do anything. I can see this being a hard feature to add but any
> >> > >> insights at all?
> >> > >> If for instance if someone were to try to tackle this problem, would
> >> > >> it need acceptance by the Projects Leads first? I guess I am still
> >> > >> unclear how to request/submit changes for android (even after reading
> >> > >> everything on the site).
By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps
from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an
issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a
restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month
and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any
worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by
the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash.
That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial
statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out
unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal
memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a
solution. We are running out of space now!
On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
> however tell you what you already know:
> I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
> unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
> apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
> email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
> pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
> games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
> don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
> on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
> issue.
Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an
effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined
broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I
totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a
device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional
considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective,
monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust.
Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as
a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or
anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling
points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be
through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where
externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think
that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
- c
On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps
> from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an
> issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a
> restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month
> and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any
> worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by
> the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash.
> That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial
> statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out
> unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal
> memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a
> solution. We are running out of space now!
> On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
> > however tell you what you already know:
> > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
> > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
> > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
> > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
> > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
> > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
> > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
> > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
> > issue.
No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may
understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things
work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical
diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but
Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of
the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no
point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use
it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install
no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no
major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync
my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync
app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I
assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive
abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than
run out of space for apps on my phone).
I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying
that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it
is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this
as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger
marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps
or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake
that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing
competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend
it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications
created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an
> effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined
> broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I
> totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a
> device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional
> considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective,
> monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust.
> Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as
> a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or
> anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling
> points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be
> through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where
> externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think
> that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
> - c
> On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps
> > from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an
> > issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a
> > restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month
> > and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any
> > worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by
> > the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash.
> > That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial
> > statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out
> > unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal
> > memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a
> > solution. We are running out of space now!
> > On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
> > > however tell you what you already know:
> > > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
> > > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
> > > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
> > > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
> > > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
> > > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
> > > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
> > > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
> > > issue.- Hide quoted text -
I think the one over-arching point you are missing here is that Android isn't intended to be a one-phone OS. The future limitations of the current Android feature-set really sit in the hands of the hardware manufacturer. It would be a mistake to assume that just because your experience with the G1 is dissatisfactory, your experience with a phone running Android is always going to be that way moving forward. If an Android device were released tomorrow that had 8 gigs of internal storage, this would be a non-issue on said device. That is why I doubt that this missing feature is the marketing disaster you claim it is.
On Nov 24, 2008 7:03 AM, "al74" <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than run out of space for apps on my phone).
I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Even if you are a non-technical us...
The fact that something is urgent or important does not change the amount of work necessary to make it work.
The fact that Google engineers have commented repeatedly on multiple threads related to this matter might suggest that Google is very much aware of the situation.
I'm not quite sure what makes you believe that there's any kind of delay going on.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:03 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may > understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things > work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical > diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but > Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of > the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no > point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use > it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install > no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no > major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync > my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync > app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I > assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive > abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than > run out of space for apps on my phone).
> I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying > that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it > is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this > as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger > marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps > or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake > that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing > competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend > it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications > created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
> On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an >> effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined >> broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I >> totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a >> device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional >> considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective, >> monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust. >> Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as >> a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or >> anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling >> points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be >> through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where >> externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think >> that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
>> - c
>> On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps >> > from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an >> > issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a >> > restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month >> > and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any >> > worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by >> > the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash. >> > That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial >> > statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out >> > unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal >> > memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a >> > solution. We are running out of space now!
>> > On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can, >> > > however tell you what you already know:
>> > > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps >> > > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few >> > > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3 >> > > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of >> > > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no >> > > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this >> > > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low >> > > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this >> > > issue.- Hide quoted text -
Here are quotes of Dianne Hackborn from a separate thread "Apps on
SD", which made me beleive this is far from sitting near the top of
Google's list:
"There really isn't much more thinking on this than what I said. This
is an
area we are thinking about, but right now there are higher priorities
so
there is not much active work going on."
"I do expect the core Android platform developers to implement this
feature
at some point, but it is not currently on our roadmap (but that also
isn't
saying much, since our roadmap currently only extends to Q1 next
year :p)."
If I'm wrong then I apologize. What you need to understand is that
when apps are free, it is easy enough for the end-user to test
applications and download them with the assumption that if he or she
ran out of space, he will just delete those not used often. However,
coming January, I don't see myself actually paying for an application
knowing that I may need to remove it in a few months if I ran out of
space and a better or a must have app comes along. That's why I think
it is very urgent to resolve this and assure us that we won't have to
remove apps that we paid for just because we ran out of storage space.
The other problem is that there is no way to manage that space. I
installed very few applications under the assumption that the apps are
pretty small so there is actually enough space for future apps.
However, I was surprised to realize that each app (and the market app
itself) consumes additional storage due to additional data that keeps
growing as you use the app. That took out the option for me to
continue using POP email as very quickly it consumed more than 16MB
and I got the low memory warnning. There is no way to know how much
storage you are actually going to have in the future so you can't
realy plan a head. With many apps sized more than 1mb (and the good
ones actually get to 6mb each) this is a real issue.
On Nov 24, 10:39 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> The fact that something is urgent or important does not change the
> amount of work necessary to make it work.
> The fact that Google engineers have commented repeatedly on multiple
> threads related to this matter might suggest that Google is very much
> aware of the situation.
> I'm not quite sure what makes you believe that there's any kind of
> delay going on.
> JBQ
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:03 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may
> > understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things
> > work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical
> > diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but
> > Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of
> > the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no
> > point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use
> > it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install
> > no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no
> > major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync
> > my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync
> > app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I
> > assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive
> > abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than
> > run out of space for apps on my phone).
> > I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying
> > that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it
> > is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this
> > as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger
> > marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps
> > or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake
> > that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing
> > competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend
> > it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications
> > created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
> > On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an
> >> effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined
> >> broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I
> >> totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a
> >> device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional
> >> considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective,
> >> monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust.
> >> Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as
> >> a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or
> >> anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling
> >> points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be
> >> through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where
> >> externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think
> >> that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
> >> - c
> >> On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps
> >> > from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an
> >> > issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a
> >> > restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month
> >> > and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any
> >> > worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by
> >> > the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash.
> >> > That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial
> >> > statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out
> >> > unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal
> >> > memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a
> >> > solution. We are running out of space now!
> >> > On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
> >> > > however tell you what you already know:
> >> > > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
> >> > > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
> >> > > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
> >> > > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
> >> > > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
> >> > > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
> >> > > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
> >> > > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
> >> > > issue.- Hide quoted text -
All right, I'll clarify Dianne's statements a tiny bit, since I understand how they could be misinterpreted.
Those higher priority items that Dianne is talking about are bugfixes for features that were put on the roadmap a long long time ago and have been implemented already. Those higher priority items are not new features that are competing with "apps on SD" for engineering resources. No feature implemented from this point on can ship before those bugs are fixed. At this point, the roadmap that Dianne mentioned is essentially the roadmap for the bugfixes in question, which means that "apps on SD" could become the first new feature to be added on that roadmap (this is not a commitment, and the choice isn't mine to make).
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:07 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are quotes of Dianne Hackborn from a separate thread "Apps on > SD", which made me beleive this is far from sitting near the top of > Google's list:
> "There really isn't much more thinking on this than what I said. This > is an > area we are thinking about, but right now there are higher priorities > so > there is not much active work going on."
> "I do expect the core Android platform developers to implement this > feature > at some point, but it is not currently on our roadmap (but that also > isn't > saying much, since our roadmap currently only extends to Q1 next > year :p)."
> If I'm wrong then I apologize. What you need to understand is that > when apps are free, it is easy enough for the end-user to test > applications and download them with the assumption that if he or she > ran out of space, he will just delete those not used often. However, > coming January, I don't see myself actually paying for an application > knowing that I may need to remove it in a few months if I ran out of > space and a better or a must have app comes along. That's why I think > it is very urgent to resolve this and assure us that we won't have to > remove apps that we paid for just because we ran out of storage space. > The other problem is that there is no way to manage that space. I > installed very few applications under the assumption that the apps are > pretty small so there is actually enough space for future apps. > However, I was surprised to realize that each app (and the market app > itself) consumes additional storage due to additional data that keeps > growing as you use the app. That took out the option for me to > continue using POP email as very quickly it consumed more than 16MB > and I got the low memory warnning. There is no way to know how much > storage you are actually going to have in the future so you can't > realy plan a head. With many apps sized more than 1mb (and the good > ones actually get to 6mb each) this is a real issue.
> On Nov 24, 10:39 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote: >> The fact that something is urgent or important does not change the >> amount of work necessary to make it work.
>> The fact that Google engineers have commented repeatedly on multiple >> threads related to this matter might suggest that Google is very much >> aware of the situation.
>> I'm not quite sure what makes you believe that there's any kind of >> delay going on.
>> JBQ
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:03 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may >> > understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things >> > work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical >> > diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but >> > Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of >> > the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no >> > point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use >> > it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install >> > no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no >> > major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync >> > my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync >> > app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I >> > assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive >> > abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than >> > run out of space for apps on my phone).
>> > I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying >> > that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it >> > is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this >> > as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger >> > marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps >> > or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake >> > that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing >> > competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend >> > it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications >> > created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
>> > On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an >> >> effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined >> >> broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I >> >> totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a >> >> device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional >> >> considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective, >> >> monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust. >> >> Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as >> >> a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or >> >> anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling >> >> points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be >> >> through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where >> >> externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think >> >> that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
>> >> - c
>> >> On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps >> >> > from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an >> >> > issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a >> >> > restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month >> >> > and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any >> >> > worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by >> >> > the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash. >> >> > That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial >> >> > statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out >> >> > unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal >> >> > memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a >> >> > solution. We are running out of space now!
>> >> > On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can, >> >> > > however tell you what you already know:
>> >> > > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps >> >> > > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few >> >> > > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3 >> >> > > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of >> >> > > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no >> >> > > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this >> >> > > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low >> >> > > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this >> >> > > issue.- Hide quoted text -
> All right, I'll clarify Dianne's statements a tiny bit, since I
> understand how they could be misinterpreted.
> Those higher priority items that Dianne is talking about are bugfixes
> for features that were put on the roadmap a long long time ago and
> have been implemented already. Those higher priority items are not new
> features that are competing with "apps on SD" for engineering
> resources. No feature implemented from this point on can ship before
> those bugs are fixed. At this point, the roadmap that Dianne mentioned
> is essentially the roadmap for the bugfixes in question, which means
> that "apps on SD" could become the first new feature to be added on
> that roadmap (this is not a commitment, and the choice isn't mine to
> make).
> JBQ
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:07 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here are quotes of Dianne Hackborn from a separate thread "Apps on
> > SD", which made me beleive this is far from sitting near the top of
> > Google's list:
> > "There really isn't much more thinking on this than what I said. This
> > is an
> > area we are thinking about, but right now there are higher priorities
> > so
> > there is not much active work going on."
> > "I do expect the core Android platform developers to implement this
> > feature
> > at some point, but it is not currently on our roadmap (but that also
> > isn't
> > saying much, since our roadmap currently only extends to Q1 next
> > year :p)."
> > If I'm wrong then I apologize. What you need to understand is that
> > when apps are free, it is easy enough for the end-user to test
> > applications and download them with the assumption that if he or she
> > ran out of space, he will just delete those not used often. However,
> > coming January, I don't see myself actually paying for an application
> > knowing that I may need to remove it in a few months if I ran out of
> > space and a better or a must have app comes along. That's why I think
> > it is very urgent to resolve this and assure us that we won't have to
> > remove apps that we paid for just because we ran out of storage space.
> > The other problem is that there is no way to manage that space. I
> > installed very few applications under the assumption that the apps are
> > pretty small so there is actually enough space for future apps.
> > However, I was surprised to realize that each app (and the market app
> > itself) consumes additional storage due to additional data that keeps
> > growing as you use the app. That took out the option for me to
> > continue using POP email as very quickly it consumed more than 16MB
> > and I got the low memory warnning. There is no way to know how much
> > storage you are actually going to have in the future so you can't
> > realy plan a head. With many apps sized more than 1mb (and the good
> > ones actually get to 6mb each) this is a real issue.
> > On Nov 24, 10:39 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote:
> >> The fact that something is urgent or important does not change the
> >> amount of work necessary to make it work.
> >> The fact that Google engineers have commented repeatedly on multiple
> >> threads related to this matter might suggest that Google is very much
> >> aware of the situation.
> >> I'm not quite sure what makes you believe that there's any kind of
> >> delay going on.
> >> JBQ
> >> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:03 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > No not realy. I am a pretty techy consumer, but although I may
> >> > understand that there are no magic solutions I do expect that things
> >> > work as long as it is technically possible. There are technical
> >> > diffculties in the implemetation of any feature or solution, but
> >> > Google needs to understand the urgency of this matter for the sake of
> >> > the developers, users and the operating system's future. There is no
> >> > point in an huge app market when there is no ability to actually use
> >> > it. Developers would have no user base if that user base can install
> >> > no more than 20 apps on their phone. I know this can be done with no
> >> > major issues on Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices. I could sync
> >> > my old Windows Mobile device and drop files to my sd with a small sync
> >> > app so I'm not sure why this ability sould not exist on Android (I
> >> > assume that you mean that this is not as good as a true usb drive
> >> > abilities, well I would rather install a sync app on my desktop than
> >> > run out of space for apps on my phone).
> >> > I am not saying that you need to ignore technicall issues. I am saying
> >> > that this problem is much more urgent than Google seems to think it
> >> > is. From reading this forum it appears that Google does not see this
> >> > as a priority. Delaying a solution here can proved to be a much bigger
> >> > marketing mistake than not including decent media apps, business apps
> >> > or decent email app out of the box (which I think was a huge mistake
> >> > that made the G1 and thus Android irrelevant compared to the existing
> >> > competition). I love this phone but there is no way I will recommend
> >> > it to anybody until I know that it can actually store the applications
> >> > created for it, like a real smartphone can do.
> >> > On Nov 24, 9:42 am, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Even if you are a non-technical user, you should probably make an
> >> >> effort to understand the current barriers to this feature as outlined
> >> >> broadly but informatively by hackbod and JBQ earlier in this thread. I
> >> >> totally agree with you regarding people and their capacity to crash a
> >> >> device as long as the potential is there, but there are additional
> >> >> considerations that need to be made for the sake of an effective,
> >> >> monetized app ecosystem that, above most things, developers trust.
> >> >> Also, would you really sacrifice the ability to mount your SD card as
> >> >> a disk on your larger pc? Not saying this feature is perfect or
> >> >> anything, but it is nice (not to mention one of the G1's major selling
> >> >> points over the iPhone) and if a system can be achieved, whether it be
> >> >> through an encrypted virtual FS or some other solution, where
> >> >> externally-stored apps can co-exist with that mountability, I think
> >> >> that good planning will be worth everyone's while.
> >> >> - c
> >> >> On Nov 18, 3:32 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > By the way, all of my Windows Mobile Devices were able to run apps
> >> >> > from the SD card. I don't believe anybody ever identified this as an
> >> >> > issue. A potential device crash (which I assume can be solved with a
> >> >> > restart) is much better than a non expandable one. Its been a month
> >> >> > and I don't have room for applications. I don't see how it can get any
> >> >> > worse. Users can do a lot of stupid things that are not recommended by
> >> >> > the manufacturer that will cause their phone to be unstable or crash.
> >> >> > That's life. Make this ability available, include some strong initial
> >> >> > statement about how it is no longer an option to get the SD card out
> >> >> > unless you turn off the phone and make sure the G2 has enough internal
> >> >> > memory to be fool proof. We cannot wait a year or even 6 months for a
> >> >> > solution. We are running out of space now!
> >> >> > On Nov 17, 8:44 pm, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > > I'm a user, not a developer and certainly can't give solutions. I can,
> >> >> > > however tell you what you already know:
> >> >> > > I am using the App Market very carefully and try not installing apps
> >> >> > > unless I truly like them. After a month with the phone and very few
> >> >> > > apps I got a message that my memory is too low. I had to remove K3
> >> >> > > email (that for some reason included 16MB of data (maybe because of
> >> >> > > pop3 emails) application to be able to install new apps. I have no
> >> >> > > games installed because my motto is: if you don't absolutely dig this
> >> >> > > don't even try it. This phone has no future if people are running low
> >> >> > > on memory so early in the game. You must. I repeat must solve this
> >> >> > > issue.- Hide quoted text -
In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider that, while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner I share them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly purchase-worthy apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or poorly thought out to be worth their time.
Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a purchased app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app store remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and let's you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish they had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be arranged where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, thereby enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?
- c
On Nov 24, 2008 8:07 AM, "al74" <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
Here are quotes of Dianne Hackborn from a separate thread "Apps on SD", which made me beleive this is far from sitting near the top of Google's list:
"There really isn't much more thinking on this than what I said. This is an area we are thinking about, but right now there are higher priorities so there is not much active work going on."
"I do expect the core Android platform developers to implement this feature at some point, but it is not currently on our roadmap (but that also isn't saying much, since our roadmap currently only extends to Q1 next year :p)."
If I'm wrong then I apologize. What you need to understand is that when apps are free, it is easy enough for the end-user to test applications and download them with the assumption that if he or she ran out of space, he will just delete those not used often. However, coming January, I don't see myself actually paying for an application knowing that I may need to remove it in a few months if I ran out of space and a better or a must have app comes along. That's why I think it is very urgent to resolve this and assure us that we won't have to remove apps that we paid for just because we ran out of storage space. The other problem is that there is no way to manage that space. I installed very few applications under the assumption that the apps are pretty small so there is actually enough space for future apps. However, I was surprised to realize that each app (and the market app itself) consumes additional storage due to additional data that keeps growing as you use the app. That took out the option for me to continue using POP email as very quickly it consumed more than 16MB and I got the low memory warnning. There is no way to know how much storage you are actually going to have in the future so you can't realy plan a head. With many apps sized more than 1mb (and the good ones actually get to 6mb each) this is a real issue.
On Nov 24, 10:39 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@google.com> wrote: > The fact that something is urge...
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 7:03 AM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >
Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD
cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright
protection perspective, why should this be any different than
installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall
apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space
issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl
something better but have no room.
On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider that,
> while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner I share
> them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly purchase-worthy
> apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or poorly
> thought out to be worth their time.
> Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a purchased
> app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app store
> remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and let's
> you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish they
> had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be arranged
> where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, thereby
> enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?
It should be different because piracy is a real problem on the PC, and
digital distribution needs to provide real answers to that problem -
ones that are fair to both developers and consumers - if we want to
further its momentum as a rising way to distribute software. Look at
the game industry, for instance, where developers are flocking away
from the PC in favor of consoles because of how badly piracy is
perceived to hurt their sales figures. Consoles offer a (relatively)
secure platform for distribution, and that small gain in security is
enough to make developers and users alike sacrifice the freedom to
choose their platform.
I think the take-away here is that you shouldn't worry because it
sounds as though everyone agrees with your main concern - the current
implementation is not ideal, especially considering the G1's internal
storage limitations. However, I think that you need to accept the
reality of the situation, which is that Android won't die if this
feature doesn't come out in the immediate future, and the Android-
developing and -using communities will both be much better off if the
solution to this problem, when it does come, is carefully planned out
and executed.
- c
On Nov 24, 10:14 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD
> cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright
> protection perspective, why should this be any different than
> installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall
> apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space
> issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl
> something better but have no room.
> On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider that,
> > while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner I share
> > them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly purchase-worthy
> > apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or poorly
> > thought out to be worth their time.
> > Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a purchased
> > app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app store
> > remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and let's
> > you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish they
> > had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be arranged
> > where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, thereby
> > enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?
Thanks for your input. Just as a note, one of the reason me and many
other chose Android was the huge publicity on its openness. As a law
abiding person who stays aways from DRM'ed solutions like fire due to
their restrictive nature I will be very disappointed if Google will
choose to restrict our ability to use software as long as we comply
with the licensing terms. DRM failed with music. It will fail with
video and software as well. If I wanted total control and restricted
content, I would have turned to Apple and the iPhone. I sure hope that
any solution to this issue will not be delayed due to DRM and content
restriction issues.
On Nov 24, 2:06 pm, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It should be different because piracy is a real problem on the PC, and
> digital distribution needs to provide real answers to that problem -
> ones that are fair to both developers and consumers - if we want to
> further its momentum as a rising way to distribute software. Look at
> the game industry, for instance, where developers are flocking away
> from the PC in favor of consoles because of how badly piracy is
> perceived to hurt their sales figures. Consoles offer a (relatively)
> secure platform for distribution, and that small gain in security is
> enough to make developers and users alike sacrifice the freedom to
> choose their platform.
> I think the take-away here is that you shouldn't worry because it
> sounds as though everyone agrees with your main concern - the current
> implementation is not ideal, especially considering the G1's internal
> storage limitations. However, I think that you need to accept the
> reality of the situation, which is that Android won't die if this
> feature doesn't come out in the immediate future, and the Android-
> developing and -using communities will both be much better off if the
> solution to this problem, when it does come, is carefully planned out
> and executed.
> - c
> On Nov 24, 10:14 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD
> > cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright
> > protection perspective, why should this be any different than
> > installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall
> > apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space
> > issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl
> > something better but have no room.
> > On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider that,
> > > while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner I share
> > > them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly purchase-worthy
> > > apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or poorly
> > > thought out to be worth their time.
> > > Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a purchased
> > > app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app store
> > > remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and let's
> > > you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish they
> > > had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be arranged
> > > where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, thereby
> > > enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?- Hide quoted text -
This is not about DRM. Applications that are on the SD card in its current form can be the victim of viruses and trojans and other such malware, completely breaking down the security system. Essentially, by giving an app on the raw SD card permission to do something, you would effectively be giving everyone permission to do that thing, since they can just go and put their own code in that app and do whatever they want with its permissions.
A cornerstone of Android is to allow for an open environment in which a user can still feel safe in downloading and trying whatever apps they want without fear of them taking over their phone or doing things they don't want them to do. We are trying as hard as we can to -not- replicate the desktop environment in this area, where historically there is little to no control over applications and you end up with a sea of viruses and virus checkers and all sorts of problems as a result. (And note that Microsoft and others are also trying to get out of this world in their current operating systems.)
Putting applications on the SD card without any security or control over what is going on there would be a huge step backwards.
It is to everyone's benefit -- users who feel safe in installing applications and developers who get more users of their applications as a result -- that the system maintain firm control what applications are allowed to do.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:07 PM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your input. Just as a note, one of the reason me and many > other chose Android was the huge publicity on its openness. As a law > abiding person who stays aways from DRM'ed solutions like fire due to > their restrictive nature I will be very disappointed if Google will > choose to restrict our ability to use software as long as we comply > with the licensing terms. DRM failed with music. It will fail with > video and software as well. If I wanted total control and restricted > content, I would have turned to Apple and the iPhone. I sure hope that > any solution to this issue will not be delayed due to DRM and content > restriction issues.
> On Nov 24, 2:06 pm, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It should be different because piracy is a real problem on the PC, and > > digital distribution needs to provide real answers to that problem - > > ones that are fair to both developers and consumers - if we want to > > further its momentum as a rising way to distribute software. Look at > > the game industry, for instance, where developers are flocking away > > from the PC in favor of consoles because of how badly piracy is > > perceived to hurt their sales figures. Consoles offer a (relatively) > > secure platform for distribution, and that small gain in security is > > enough to make developers and users alike sacrifice the freedom to > > choose their platform.
> > I think the take-away here is that you shouldn't worry because it > > sounds as though everyone agrees with your main concern - the current > > implementation is not ideal, especially considering the G1's internal > > storage limitations. However, I think that you need to accept the > > reality of the situation, which is that Android won't die if this > > feature doesn't come out in the immediate future, and the Android- > > developing and -using communities will both be much better off if the > > solution to this problem, when it does come, is carefully planned out > > and executed.
> > - c
> > On Nov 24, 10:14 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD > > > cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright > > > protection perspective, why should this be any different than > > > installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall > > > apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space > > > issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl > > > something better but have no room.
> > > On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider > that, > > > > while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner > I share > > > > them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly > purchase-worthy > > > > apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or > poorly > > > > thought out to be worth their time.
> > > > Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a > purchased > > > > app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app > store > > > > remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and > let's > > > > you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish > they > > > > had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be > arranged > > > > where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, > thereby > > > > enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?- Hide quoted text -
Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to provide private support. All such questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see and answer them.
> This is not about DRM. Applications that are on the SD card in its current
> form can be the victim of viruses and trojans and other such malware,
> completely breaking down the security system. Essentially, by giving an app
> on the raw SD card permission to do something, you would effectively be
> giving everyone permission to do that thing, since they can just go and put
> their own code in that app and do whatever they want with its permissions.
> A cornerstone of Android is to allow for an open environment in which a user
> can still feel safe in downloading and trying whatever apps they want
> without fear of them taking over their phone or doing things they don't want
> them to do. We are trying as hard as we can to -not- replicate the desktop
> environment in this area, where historically there is little to no control
> over applications and you end up with a sea of viruses and virus checkers
> and all sorts of problems as a result. (And note that Microsoft and others
> are also trying to get out of this world in their current operating
> systems.)
> Putting applications on the SD card without any security or control over
> what is going on there would be a huge step backwards.
> It is to everyone's benefit -- users who feel safe in installing
> applications and developers who get more users of their applications as a
> result -- that the system maintain firm control what applications are
> allowed to do.
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:07 PM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for your input. Just as a note, one of the reason me and many
> > other chose Android was the huge publicity on its openness. As a law
> > abiding person who stays aways from DRM'ed solutions like fire due to
> > their restrictive nature I will be very disappointed if Google will
> > choose to restrict our ability to use software as long as we comply
> > with the licensing terms. DRM failed with music. It will fail with
> > video and software as well. If I wanted total control and restricted
> > content, I would have turned to Apple and the iPhone. I sure hope that
> > any solution to this issue will not be delayed due to DRM and content
> > restriction issues.
> > On Nov 24, 2:06 pm, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It should be different because piracy is a real problem on the PC, and
> > > digital distribution needs to provide real answers to that problem -
> > > ones that are fair to both developers and consumers - if we want to
> > > further its momentum as a rising way to distribute software. Look at
> > > the game industry, for instance, where developers are flocking away
> > > from the PC in favor of consoles because of how badly piracy is
> > > perceived to hurt their sales figures. Consoles offer a (relatively)
> > > secure platform for distribution, and that small gain in security is
> > > enough to make developers and users alike sacrifice the freedom to
> > > choose their platform.
> > > I think the take-away here is that you shouldn't worry because it
> > > sounds as though everyone agrees with your main concern - the current
> > > implementation is not ideal, especially considering the G1's internal
> > > storage limitations. However, I think that you need to accept the
> > > reality of the situation, which is that Android won't die if this
> > > feature doesn't come out in the immediate future, and the Android-
> > > developing and -using communities will both be much better off if the
> > > solution to this problem, when it does come, is carefully planned out
> > > and executed.
> > > - c
> > > On Nov 24, 10:14 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD
> > > > cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright
> > > > protection perspective, why should this be any different than
> > > > installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall
> > > > apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space
> > > > issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl
> > > > something better but have no room.
> > > > On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider
> > that,
> > > > > while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner
> > I share
> > > > > them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly
> > purchase-worthy
> > > > > apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or
> > poorly
> > > > > thought out to be worth their time.
> > > > > Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a
> > purchased
> > > > > app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app
> > store
> > > > > remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and
> > let's
> > > > > you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish
> > they
> > > > > had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be
> > arranged
> > > > > where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account,
> > thereby
> > > > > enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?- Hide quoted text -
> Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
> provide private support. All such questions should be posted on public
> forums, where I and others can see and answer them.- Hide quoted text -
Of course, in many ways running *any* application is a leap of faith. ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000446.html ). Any app (including any of the many free apps appearing) could, in theory, use permissions granted for other than the stated purposes.
Having been involved in applications security design in Unix (later Linux) environments for several decades, I am unconvinced that there is a necessary relationship in the Android security model that should depend on whether or not a particular object is on internal or mountable media. We've been dealing with setuid (for example) applications on removable media of all sorts since Unix Version 6 (and earlier). And as others have noted, other mobile platforms have achieved reasonable security levels while not restricting applications to internal memory storage.
Creating a system to verify the integrity of applications and their permissions, independent of stored location, even if tied to phone IMEI, should not be a major effort and should be a high priority, unless having G1 buyers feel that they were sucked into something of a bait-and-switch situation is not a concern.
> This is not about DRM. Applications that are on the SD card in its current > form can be the victim of viruses and trojans and other such malware, > completely breaking down the security system. Essentially, by giving an app > on the raw SD card permission to do something, you would effectively be > giving everyone permission to do that thing, since they can just go and put > their own code in that app and do whatever they want with its permissions.
> A cornerstone of Android is to allow for an open environment in which a user > can still feel safe in downloading and trying whatever apps they want > without fear of them taking over their phone or doing things they don't want > them to do. We are trying as hard as we can to -not- replicate the desktop > environment in this area, where historically there is little to no control > over applications and you end up with a sea of viruses and virus checkers > and all sorts of problems as a result. (And note that Microsoft and others > are also trying to get out of this world in their current operating > systems.)
> Putting applications on the SD card without any security or control over > what is going on there would be a huge step backwards.
> It is to everyone's benefit -- users who feel safe in installing > applications and developers who get more users of their applications as a > result -- that the system maintain firm control what applications are > allowed to do.
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:07 PM, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for your input. Just as a note, one of the reason me and many > > other chose Android was the huge publicity on its openness. As a law > > abiding person who stays aways from DRM'ed solutions like fire due to > > their restrictive nature I will be very disappointed if Google will > > choose to restrict our ability to use software as long as we comply > > with the licensing terms. DRM failed with music. It will fail with > > video and software as well. If I wanted total control and restricted > > content, I would have turned to Apple and the iPhone. I sure hope that > > any solution to this issue will not be delayed due to DRM and content > > restriction issues.
> > On Nov 24, 2:06 pm, Christopher Joel <Aar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It should be different because piracy is a real problem on the PC, and > > > digital distribution needs to provide real answers to that problem - > > > ones that are fair to both developers and consumers - if we want to > > > further its momentum as a rising way to distribute software. Look at > > > the game industry, for instance, where developers are flocking away > > > from the PC in favor of consoles because of how badly piracy is > > > perceived to hurt their sales figures. Consoles offer a (relatively) > > > secure platform for distribution, and that small gain in security is > > > enough to make developers and users alike sacrifice the freedom to > > > choose their platform.
> > > I think the take-away here is that you shouldn't worry because it > > > sounds as though everyone agrees with your main concern - the current > > > implementation is not ideal, especially considering the G1's internal > > > storage limitations. However, I think that you need to accept the > > > reality of the situation, which is that Android won't die if this > > > feature doesn't come out in the immediate future, and the Android- > > > developing and -using communities will both be much better off if the > > > solution to this problem, when it does come, is carefully planned out > > > and executed.
> > > - c
> > > On Nov 24, 10:14 am, al74 <aviadle...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Applications for BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile are kept on SD > > > > cards and I never heard of any issues on Dev part. From copyright > > > > protection perspective, why should this be any different than > > > > installing apps on a Desktop PC? As to the possibility to reinstall > > > > apps, that's not going to help if I can't reinstall due to the space > > > > issues. I will have to give up the app because I want to installl > > > > something better but have no room.
> > > > On Nov 24, 11:57 am, Chris <aar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > In addition to considering what JBQ pointed out, you should consider > > that, > > > > > while your concerns about app space are legitimate and as a G1 owner > > I share > > > > > them, developers won't flock to Android and release truly > > purchase-worthy > > > > > apps if they think that the distribution system is too insecure or > > poorly > > > > > thought out to be worth their time.
> > > > > Furthermore, is it set in stone that the only way to re-aquire a > > purchased > > > > > app you have deleted is to re-purchase it? I know that Apple's app > > store > > > > > remembers your purchases, as they are tied to your Apple account, and > > let's > > > > > you re-download previously- purchased apps for free (something I wish > > they > > > > > had done with their music years ago). Surely a system could be > > arranged > > > > > where app store purchases are tied to a user's Google account, > > thereby > > > > > enabling unlimited, free post-purchase downloads?- Hide quoted text -
> Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to > provide private support. All such questions should be posted on public > forums, where I and others can see and answer them.
> This is not about DRM. Applications that are on the SD card in its current form can be the victim of viruses and trojans and other such malware, comple > tely breaking down the security system. Essentially, by giving an app on the raw SD card permission to do something, you would effectively be giving ev > eryone permission to do that thing, since they can just go and put their own code in that app and do whatever they want with its permissions.<br> > <br>A cornerstone of Android is to allow for an open environment in which a user can still feel safe in downloading and trying whatever apps they want withou > t fear of them taking over their phone or doing things they don't want them to do. We are trying as hard as we can to -not- replicate the desktop e > nvironment in this area, where historically there is little to no control over applications and you end up with a sea of viruses and virus checkers and all s > orts of problems as a result. (And note that Microsoft and others are also trying to get out of this world in their current operating systems.)<br> > <br>Putting applications on the SD card without any security or control over what is going on there would be a huge step backwards.<br><br>It is to everyone& > #39;s benefit -- users who feel safe in installing applications and developers who get more users of their applications as a result -- that the system mainta > in firm control what applications are allowed to do.<br> > <br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:07 PM, al74 <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aviadle...@gmail.com">aviadle...@gmail.com</a>></sp > an> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> > <br> > Thanks for your input. Just as a note, one of the reason me and many<br> > other chose Android was the huge publicity on its openness. As a law<br> > abiding person who stays aways from DRM'ed solutions like fire due to<br> > their restrictive nature I will be very disappointed if Google will<br> > choose to restrict our ability to use software as long as we comply<br> > with the licensing terms. DRM failed with music. It will fail with<br> > video and software as well. If I wanted total control and restricted<br> > content, I would have turned to Apple and the iPhone. I sure hope that<br> > any solution to this issue will not be delayed due to
Lauren Weinstein wrote: > Creating a system to verify the integrity of applications and their > permissions, independent of stored location, even if tied to phone > IMEI, should not be a major effort
How long would it take you to write it? Perhaps we can raise the funds to hire you to create that implementation. Then there is no dependency on perceptions of priority.
I'm thinking of something along the lines of Gregory Brown's Ruby Mendicant project from earlier this year:
