Quick note on CDMA devices

Showing 1-34 of 34 messages
Quick note on CDMA devices Dan Morrill 2/3/12 2:01 PM
Hello! This is a quick clarification about support for CDMA devices.

For various technical reasons, recent CDMA Android devices implement core telephony functionality in .apk files provided in binary form by the carriers. To function correctly, these .apk files must be signed by the so-called "platform" key. However, when an individual creates a custom build from the AOSP source code, they don't use the same signing key as these CDMA flies were signed with.

The result is that these files don't work properly, and pure AOSP builds running on these devices can't place calls, access mobile data, and so on. Because we aim to make sure that we are as clear as possible about the degree of support that devices have, we updated the docs over at source.android.com to reflect this reality.

We will still make available as many as possible of the closed-source binaries for these devices, and Nexus devices will continue to have unlockable bootloaders. And, of course, GSM/HSPA+ devices are still supported, as are any other devices we're able to support. We've simply updated the documentation to be clearer about the current extent of CDMA support.

We are of course always working to improve support, and we'll keep everyone updated as we make improvements. Thanks as always for your interest in AOSP!

- Dan
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices cybik 2/3/12 2:25 PM
Thanks for clarifying!
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Pete 2/3/12 2:36 PM
Will Android OS updates be provided by Google or Verizon going forward for the Verizon Galaxy Nexus LTE?  Are you still considering the Verizon Galaxy Nexus LTE a "Nexus" device?
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Drew Walters 2/3/12 3:33 PM
The main problem with this response is, I bought this phone over a month ago. This isn't news...it's old hat. There was an underlying implication that you guys understood this. How is this going to be handled? How will Google even up the score for us CDMA owners and our plaguing issues? It is no secret it has more issues than the GSM....it also is no secret that there has been problems with Verizon from the start. My question is, me as a customer and upcoming developer, just had his phone axed by the creator less than 60 days after purchasing it....and technically I am locked in with it for 2 years. How do you respond to that? I am not the only one in the boat.
unk...@googlegroups.com 2/3/12 3:37 PM <This message has been deleted.>
unk...@googlegroups.com 2/3/12 4:24 PM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices d.note 2/3/12 4:42 PM
So what's the remedy to the problem here?? Because the average user does not understand what this means. Will Google CDMA phones not get timely updates, if so that forces people to go to apple or windows and i'm sure google would not want that.
unk...@googlegroups.com 2/3/12 4:56 PM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Jacob Mata 2/3/12 5:17 PM
so the verizon galaxy nexus wont be updated ever again?
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Drew 2/3/12 5:21 PM
So, is Toro going to be added back to AOSP or did we basically get bullied out of it?
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/3/12 5:29 PM
"The result is that these files don't work properly, and pure AOSP builds running on these devices can't place calls, access mobile data, and so on. Because we aim to make sure that we are as clear as possible about the degree of support that devices have, we updated the docs over at source.android.com to reflect this reality."

Is that entirely true? I can run the extract-files.sh script, have it pull the proprietary files that are mentioned in post, build and radio with all other functions are working fine. Or does that not make it a "pure" AOSP build? The files are still signed by Verizon and everything works.

Who will be pushing updates to the Galaxy Nexus LTE device now, Google or Verizon? Will they be released at the same time as the GSM models or a slight delay like the Nexus S 4G getting ICS after the GSM model?

Just curious...

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices propus 2/3/12 6:36 PM
So in basic speech what does this mean to Sprint Nexus S 4G owners? Will we get Android 4.0?  And if so, any ETA?
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Joshua Rosen 2/4/12 10:05 AM
What does this mean for owners of the Verizon GN? Are we going to be getting updates or are we stuck with 4.0.2?
Quick note on CDMA devices revelry1973 2/5/12 11:10 AM
Hello Dan, Can you please explain what this means to a verizon galaxy nexus user?  You know when this device launched we all were anxious to sign up for a phone that would have its updates come from el goog.  This platform has experienced so much fragmentation partly because google/hardware manufacturers and cell providers can't decide on anything.  For the newest flagship google phone not being supported is very discouraging.  Why launch with so much hoopla then just dump it and say "cdma" reasons is very puzzling.  This feels so much like a bait and switch.  Now we have to wait for our updates from verizon...argh.  Verizon and the harware manufacturers take so long to integrate your newest technologies.  At least apple supports their devices for several years. What happened to the close knit development of this device with samsung and verizon. Please explain how this really affects a user of your flagship device?  My gnexus boots with a big "google" logo....should have replaced that with a "verizon" logo. Argh.  To sit up on stage at the launch event and talk about partnerships now just seems like a great marketing ploy.  Please advise.  If I am interpreting this wrong i apologize thank you
unk...@googlegroups.com 2/5/12 11:13 AM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Wayne 2/5/12 11:59 PM
The link that you posted gives no such detail pertaining to this topic. Just what does this imply? Does it imply that there will be no more support for any CDMA device? From here on out? No such support? All Verizon Wireless and Sprint customers have CDMA handheld devices. Would you care to elaborate on this manner? Thanks
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices @paulobrien 2/3/12 2:27 PM
Hey Dan, thanks for the post.

Resigning the provided APK with one's own platform key thereby
circumventing this issue is pretty trivial though right?

P
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Jean-Baptiste Queru 2/6/12 8:16 AM
Lots of people have been asking questions (and most have managed to
keep those questions polite, which is very much appreciated), so I
won't be able to reply individually to every single message.

I will post a longer explanation as soon as I get a chance, but until
I do I want to emphasize one thing: the only affected aspect is the
support for AOSP builds, i.e. building Android from source code and
installing it on those devices. Other aspects are unaffected.

JBQ

--
Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.

Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
warning.

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Drew 2/6/12 8:30 AM
But this is the MAIN REASON why thousands of people have purchased
this device. How are we going to have a "development" device if we
can't even built source and flash it? I am truly let down by this
whole situation. We purchased this device with this being one of the
biggest selling points. So now you're going to take away that from us
when we're locked into a 2 year contract? How much more unfair can
this possibly get? I understand there are issues with CDMA and to be
honest this is probably my last Verizon device because I'm sick of
getting the short end of the stick because of CDMA. All I know is that
me and tons of other people are locked into a 2 year contract and now
what attracted me to the device the most is gone. This sucks.........

On Feb 6, 11:16 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> Lots of people have been asking questions (and most have managed to
> keep those questions polite, which is very much appreciated), so I
> won't be able to reply individually to every single message.
>
> I will post a longer explanation as soon as I get a chance, but until
> I do I want to emphasize one thing: the only affected aspect is the
> support for AOSP builds, i.e. building Android from source code and
> installing it on those devices. Other aspects are unaffected.
>
> JBQ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Drew Walters 2/6/12 8:41 AM
I am still extremely confused on how something like this happens and how Google will respond to us being stuck with a device that lost it's main selling point to anyone in the "know how". From a marketing standpoint as well as a reputable stand point....this doesn't seem like a good move at all. It does make it feel like a small group of us Nexus owners are all of a sudden not important to the process -- after all...our money has already been spent. I can't return my device. 
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Anthony Stevens 2/6/12 9:54 AM
I've built the AOSP code for the Nexus 4G from Sprint, and it's running without any problems.  So it's unclear why Sprint's CDMA devices were pulled as well.
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 10:44 AM
If Google leaves the extract script in place then you can pull the
files that are needed to build AOSP properly for the GNex.  You can
also pull the files from any OTA updates.  Like in the new 4.0.4
leaked version :)

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Drew <andrewb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Jean-Baptiste Queru 2/6/12 10:46 AM
Note that you can't do that without having appropriate licenses from
the owners of all those files.

JBQ

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 10:49 AM
Are the extract scripts being removed?
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Jean-Baptiste Queru 2/6/12 10:52 AM
Not in the immediate future. In a distant future, they're replaced by
a form that works better for me (they're my private tools, after all,
but even for me they don't work well enough with CDMA devices).

JBQ

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 10:54 AM
Thank you for your replies and time.
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 11:00 AM
If I may ask one more question.

It was stated that some of the files needed will be provided but the
same day that was stated the files were removed from the drivers page,
why? Does Google not have the license from Verizon to distribute them?

OK that was two questions...

Thanks once again!

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Jean-Baptiste Queru 2/6/12 11:06 AM
None of the files have been removed, at least not intentionally.
Unless something is wrong, they're still on the drivers page, but
they've been moved all the way to the bottom, and aren't linked from
the table of content.

JBQ

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 11:07 AM
Oh must have missed that.  Thanks!
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Drew 2/6/12 11:15 AM
Can we please get an answer about this whole situation though? I just
want to know if Toro will be back on AOSP since that is what the main
selling point of the device was to thousands of people. Just the
thought of it not coming back makes me feel like I've been cheated and
I have never felt that way with Android before. After all you guys
pushed this phone as a developers device and that is NOT what it is as
of right now...... do the right thing for your customers

On Feb 6, 2:06 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> None of the files have been removed, at least not intentionally.
> Unless something is wrong, they're still on the drivers page, but
> they've been moveotd all the way to the bottom, and aren't linked from
> the table of content.
>
> JBQ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Angelo S <androiduser00110...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I may ask one more question.
>
> > It was stated that some of the files needed will be provided but the
> > same day that was stated the files were removed from the drivers page,
> > why? Does Google not have the license from Verizon to distribute them?
>
> > OK that was two questions...
>
> > Thanks once again!
>
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> >> Not in the immediate future. In a distant future, they're replaced by
> >> a form that works better for me (they're my private tools, after all,
> >> but even for me they don't work well enough with CDMA devices).
>
> >> JBQ
>
> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Angelo S <androiduser00110...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Are the extract scripts being removed?
>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> >>>> Note that you can't do that without having appropriate licenses from
> >>>> the owners of all those files.
>
> >>>> JBQ
>
> >>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Angelo S <androiduser00110...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> If Google leaves the extract script in place then you can pull the
> >>>>> files that are needed to build AOSP properly for the GNex.  You can
> >>>>> also pull the files from any OTA updates.  Like in the new 4.0.4
> >>>>> leaked version :)
>
> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Drew <andrewborges...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> But this is the MAIN REASON why thousands of people have purchased
> >>>>>> this device. How are we going to have a "development" device if we
> >>>>>> can't even built source and flash it? I am truly let down by this
> >>>>>> whole situation. We purchased this device with this being one of the
> >>>>>> biggest selling points. So now you're going to take away that from us
> >>>>>> when we're locked into a 2 year contract? How much more unfair can
> >>>>>> this possibly get? I understand there are issues with CDMA and to be
> >>>>>> honest this is probably my last Verizon device because I'm sick of
> >>>>>> getting the short end of the stick because of CDMA. All I know is that
> >>>>>> me and tons of other people are locked into a 2 year contract and now
> >>>>>> what attracted me to the device the most is gone. This sucks.........
>
> >>>>>> On Feb 6, 11:16 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Lots of people have been asking questions (and most have managed to
> >>>>>>> keep those questions polite, which is very much appreciated), so I
> >>>>>>> won't be able to reply individually to every single message.
>
> >>>>>>> I will post a longer explanation as soon as I get a chance, but until
> >>>>>>> I do I want to emphasize one thing: the only affected aspect is the
> >>>>>>> support for AOSP builds, i.e. building Android from source code and
> >>>>>>> installing it on those devices. Other aspects are unaffected.
>
> >>>>>>> JBQ
>
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Dan Morrill <morri...@google.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> > Hello! This is a quick clarification about support for CDMA devices.
>
> >>>>>>> > For various technical reasons, recent CDMA Android devices implement core
> >>>>>>> > telephony functionality in .apk files provided in binary form by the
> >>>>>>> > carriers. To function correctly, these .apk files must be signed by the
> >>>>>>> > so-called "platform" key. However, when an individual creates a custom build
> >>>>>>> > from the AOSP source code, they don't use the same signing key as these CDMA
> >>>>>>> > flies were signed with.
>
> >>>>>>> > The result is that these files don't work properly, and pure AOSP builds
> >>>>>>> > running on these devices can't place calls, access mobile data, and so
> >>>>>>> > on. Because we aim to make sure that we are as clear as possible about the
> >>>>>>> > degree of support that devices have, we updated the docs over at
> >>>>>>> > source.android.com to reflect this reality.
>
> >>>>>>> > We will still make available as many as possible of the closed-source
> >>>>>>> > binaries for these devices, and Nexus devices will continue to have
> >>>>>>> > unlockable bootloaders. And, of course, GSM/HSPA+ devices are still
> >>>>>>> > supported, as are any other devices we're able to support. We've simply
> >>>>>>> > updated the documentation to be clearer about the current extent of CDMA
> >>>>>>> > support.
>
> >>>>>>> > We are of course always working to improve support, and we'll keep everyone
> >>>>>>> > updated as we make improvements. Thanks as always for your interest in AOSP!
>
> >>>>>>> > - Dan
>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
> >>>>>>> Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.
>
> >>>>>>> Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
> >>>>>>> will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
> >>>>>>> warning.
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
> >>>> Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.
>
> >>>> Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
> >>>> will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
> >>>> warning.
>
> >> --
> >> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
> >> Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.
>
> >> Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
> >> will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
> >> warning.
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
> Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.
>
> Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
> will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
> warning.
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 11:27 AM
Too bad this did not happen in the EU, they fight more for consumer
rights, The whole Playstation other OS option thing. They won a
judgement against Sony for something like that while in the States the
same basic lawsuit was shot down.

Verizon and Google should make it right to Consumers.  Give option for
different device or money back and no ETF fee.

You can use any phone to develop apps on, even the most locked down
Moto phone so I don't see how this can still be considered a dev
phone.

We should have seen this coming, some of us did, when Verizon was
allowed to put crapware on the phone and have the Verizon logo on the
back instead of the Google logo.

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Chris Kirby 2/6/12 12:03 PM
agreed...give me my money back, get me out of this contract, and let me get the actual nexus device. I knew Verizon was a trap, but i trusted Google and figured they had it all worked out. Now we're all stuck and locked in with Verizon on an unsupported device. We got screwed plain and simple. Official AOSP support is why i bought this phone, anything less is totally unacceptable. Why in the hell didn't they just let Best Buy sell us the unlocked GSM version like they did with the Nexus S? This is a total mess and I truly hope its rectified quickly.
Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Angelo S 2/6/12 11:34 AM
One more thing, I am not a lawyer but hopefully this can be deemed as
a breach of contract.  You paid for a development device that had the
backing of Google and sold to you by Verizon as that.  You sign a 2
year contract to obtain GNex at a lower cost for two years and support
as a development device is taking a way two months into contract.

Of course if you go into your local Verizon store or call customer
service they will have no idea on what you are talking about if you
happen to mention this. So consumers get the short end of the stick
again.

This is what stinks about having phones exclusive for one carrier.
People on Verizon have been waiting for a Nexus phone since the Nexus
One dropped and now they get stiffed a couple of months after release.

Re: Quick note on CDMA devices Dan Morrill 2/6/12 1:27 PM
Hi, all! Thanks for all the questions. Here’s a quick omnibus to answer the questions folks have asked...

First, just to be clear this change is only related to AOSP support for these devices -- that is, personal custom builds. These are obviously still officially-supported Nexus devices for everyday use, they will receive official software updates, and so on. Similarly, these are still fully-supported development devices for app developers.

Second, as I noted at the top of the thread, Nexus devices will still have unlocked bootloaders, and we’ll continue to make available as many of the closed-source binaries as we can. CDMA support in AOSP has always been more challenging than GSM, and this change is a reflection of that reality.

On that topic, here’s a quick clarification on the core issue. Every device has a number of closed-source software packages included on it. Though Google distributes some of these binaries for Nexus devices for use with AOSP, Google does not own the software. Rather, this software is variously owned by the device manufacturer, the carrier, and their suppliers. We try to get distribution rights for as many of these binaries as possible, but in some cases it is difficult or impossible to obtain these rights. (CDMA specifically has a tricky history of intellectual property.) Combined with the technical issues of needing to sign the apks correctly, this has prevented us from obtaining the distribution rights we need to support these devices in AOSP.

Finally, we will of course continue to work on improving support. If we can resolve these issues, we’ll certainly restore CDMA support to AOSP. In the meantime, we’ve updated our docs to be more accurate about the degree of support.

I hope that answers your questions! For those of you with more technical questions, JBQ’s posted with more gory technical details over on android-platform -- https://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/10c8db7b1c893e1e.

(I’m going to go ahead and close this thread now; I realized after the fact that android-contrib was not the appropriate list for this. Let’s move the discussion over to android-platform, which is a better place. I’m going to close out this thread now, so that the folks on android-contrib can get back to business.)

- Dan
More topics »