“With the Samsung Galaxy S4 presumably coming soon, many are excited about the possibility of running a more stock Android-based experience, like CyanogenMod, on the hardware. It looks like that’s going to be a slower transition than many were hoping, as the current Samsung CM maintainers have said that they have no plans to support the device.” If you like custom ROMs, don’t buy Samsung. As simple as that.
I wonder if/when we’ll ever have an open-source kernel driver for big.LITTLE machines. The Exynos 5 Octa is the first such machine on the market, and it will be interesting to see how this bimodal strategy plays out against the middle-road taken by Krait and Swift.
At the very least, it will be important for the future of the Linux kernel to support these kinds of heterogeneous processor architectures. And if ARM wants to get their upcoming A57/A53 designs into the datacenter, they need mainline kernel support.
Linaro (sp?) is doing a bunch of work in the mainline kernel scheduler to support aMP (asymmetric multi-processing). This would allow you to access *all* of the CPU cores (A7 and A15) and gain finer-grained control over which processes go to which cores. My guess is that it won’t appear in Android until 5.0. But, at least it’s being worked on.
It’s quite a stretch going from the lack of CyanogenMod support for the Samsung Galaxy S4 to the advice “If you like custom ROMs, don’t buy Samsung.”
Nobody else is prevented from doing custom ROMs and CyanogenMod for other Samsung phones continues to work fine.
The general rule of thumb in the Android ROM atm is if CyanogenMod can’t make a ROM then it’s got to be difficult to make one. That’s not to say impossible it’s just that when they run into problems most of the others will ALSO run into the same problems. And as to CyanogenMod working on other Samsung phones/devices, yes it does work but it’s the whole spirit of needing to give the company a concrete message that creating devices which the comunity can’t tailor to their needs ISN’T okay and will be punished by not having our sales. Whether this action actually gets anybody anywhere is a different discussion
We see changes in motivation and people stepping in and out of free open-source projects every day and it is absolutely normal.
Why do these people rage, shout, cry about being deceived, push own political agenda of not buying that and but buying this, without any details besides personal blog rants, posts of mysterious Samsung employees, promises of help, but no requests or denial of that help? Why don’t they write an open letter to Samsung stating what exactly they need and why?
IMHO, when somebody is not up to the task, they should just step down and go on with their life. If need be more will come and finish the job, considering that work is still relevant and motivating enough for them.
Perhaps by custom ROMs they meant to say AOSP ROMs or ROMs built from source as opposed totaking an existing stock ROM and de-bloating it.
CyanogenMod ran terrible on my T-Mobile Galaxy S3 even though Steve Kondik personally used the device.
Battery life was horrible and bluetooth didn’t work.
I sold it for $400, got a Nexus 4 and couldn’t be happier.
For my own company (and also Private) it was a KO Criteria for smartphones to be able to run custom mods like Cyanogenmod. So i own 2x Samsung S2 and 1x HTC One.
The reason is to have recent android versions if the phone is considered EOL from the Manufacturer or the Manufacturer doesnt provide the desired Android version.
Just because the current maintainers have no plans doesn’t mean a new one won’t come along. Plus there will always be “debloated” stock based roms that will be close to stock. This is the case with many less popular devices. I though Cyanogen got a job with Samsung, strange that they would be so poor with releasing source. What about the Nexus 10, doesn’t that have a exynos processor?
No big loss to me, the S4 doesn’t really appeal to me at all.
Yes Cyanogen works for Samsung. Unfortunately, he’s not ceo of Samsung so their are limits to what he personally can accomplish.
Now Cyanogenmod is more than just Cyanogen himself. Its those others that have decided to recommend against Samsung.
I’ve always said that if I were ever to buy an Android phone, the first think I would do was run cyanogenmod on it. In fact, I’ve insisted on all my tech friends who bought an Android device to do the same thing and they all had positive things to say.
What’s the point in buying a Samsung device if you won’t get cyanogen on it. I’d rather buy an HTC.
From Cyanogen himself:
https://plus.google.com/u/1/100275307499530023476/posts/8hPLjoCDBkK
An individual contributor to the project doesn’t speak for the project as a whole.
I’ve contributed to the linux kernel, I thought any device running either linux or a derivative of linux would be open for me to change as I see fit, but obviously not, because I cannot change the samsung note II that I bought for my wife. So to me, believing in GPL was a waste of time.
GPL V2 has no such requirement. If you submitted code under this license, then you have no reason to complain.
GPL V3 does.
The kernel is staying GPL V2 for two reasons:
1) The founder and head of the “official” kernel prefers it to V3.
2) It would require asking everyone who had ever contributed to the kernel’s permission to change the license.
If you consider the time you spend hacking on the kernel a waste, it was due to your lack of understanding in the GPL V2 license.
You should note, that Samsung does fulfill its GPL V2 license obligations.
opensource.samsung.com
You can find all of the GPL V2 source code that was used in the Galaxy Note (Model number GT-N7100).
Except that, no, they don’t. The sources that are available from Samsung do not match the binaries shipped by Samsung on their S2/S3/Note devices. Many of the CM Samsung device maintainers have given up trying to get the right source from Samsung.
Have a read through this to get the inside scoop on just how poorly Samsung complies with the GPL:
https://plus.google.com/101093310520661581786/posts/cdPnNjLAb4F
I was not aware of such shenanigans. Although they are kind of minor, It would be nice if someone actually had the bankroll and sufficient attitude to actually sue them for the violations that crop up. It kind of seems like they are more incompetent at providing source than malicious.
Say, Apple?
Pretty sure they wouldn’t pass on opportunity to harass their main competition through some disguised civil suit or w/e.
But isn’t every GPL violation easily settled by simply complying and providing current source somewhere online?
Edited 2013-03-19 22:23 UTC
You’re assuming they actually have the source for that build tagged and stored as such.
I’m not assuming that they do. If they do then either they just suck at following through on the request, or they really are trying to hide small modifications that they’ve made in those builds for what ever reasons ( binary modules making use of GPL ONLY Interface? compiled no GPL module directly into kernel?, Embarrassed about the off color language embedded into variable names? Embarrassed about the code quality? )
j/k guys…
EDIT: wrong link :/
https://plus.google.com/103583939320326217147/posts/4xRCtRGq5Qe
Edited 2013-03-19 18:04 UTC
“If you like custom ROMs, don’t buy Samsung. As simple as that.”
It is by far not that simple.
1) samsung as a device maker is custom rom friendly. samsung as a chip maker is custom rom unfriendly.
2) galaxy s4 is not a device. it is a family of devices. galaxy S4s for US have quallcom SOC. those will run CyanogenMod just fine. international galaxy S4s with the samsung exynos SOC, those will not run AOSP based roms well or at all.
3) there will be lots of custom roms based on crapwiz. those will work ok on all S4s. tey will be a little bit debloated and maybe a little prettier than stock, but still the crapwiz i have come to detest.
The problem is that its close to impossible get AOSP (non crapwiz) to run on an exynos SOC at this time.
I got rid of my galaxy ass 3 for this reason. I miss the AMOLED screen sometimes, but that sacrifice was totally worth it. Worth the effort to import it from Germany…
If you like Android, don’t buy Samsung.
WOW. Just WOW!!!
Although Thoms conclusion is not correct IMHO, your generalization *is* correct…
funny, and sad at the same time.
wow …
My generalization : If i want to really know something about anything stop reading flashy OSNEWS headlines … and do / think the opposite of what i read on the comments
Funny , since i own a samsung i9000 ( galaxy S ) and a nexus 7 tablet.
And i have better and more cyanogenmod based roms for the samsung i9000 than for the nexus 7 tablet.
Samsung Galaxy S is one of the best devices to flash. And it runs great, even for its age.
Its kinda stupid to not recommend Samsung when Htc / Sony / etc are far worse. Only recent ( 1 year i think ) Htc started to open its bootloaders. Sony … well , i had a sony arc s … gave it away … stupid locked bootloaders.
On samsung … rooting , flashing , unlocking is super easy ( at least on my galaxy s )
Actually Sony is quite a lot better now. They even provide AOSP compatible binary blobs. Not the best situation, but far better than others…
Yes , much much better than those bad companies that actually submit filesystems to the kernel tree ….
!!! Bad Samsung , dont submit open source , you evil company !!!!
Original Galaxy S: great for running/developing custom ROMs.
Some Galaxy S2 models: great for running/dev custom ROMs.
Other Galaxy S2 models: crap for custom ROMs
Some Galaxy S3 models: great for running/dev custom ROMs.
Other Galaxy S3 models: crap for custom ROMs
See the pattern yet?
If the Galaxy device uses a Qualcomm SoC, then it’s fairly easy to get/dev ROMs for it. Some things may not work, but the basics are there.
If the Galaxy device uses a Samsung SoC, good luck getting drivers for it.
Oh, and Sony provides all the tools you need to unlock the bootloader. There’s even a simple website with all the info, straight from Sony. Granted, the carrier has the option of removing support for easy-unlocking of the bootloader. But there’s even methods to get around that, all nicely documented.
Surprisingly, Sony has become very custom ROM developer-friendly since the release of the 2011 Xperia phones.
2012 LG phones are also surprisingly easy to develop for. In fact, there’s even a free (or $1 donation) app in the Play store to unlock the bootloader on the Optimus G (Freegee app). Does it get any easier than that?
Edited 2013-03-19 21:23 UTC
IMHO.
Sony, LG, other OEMs, utilizing standard components, providing a rehash of AOSP on one side, and Samsung, having developed their own SoC, putting much effort into TouchWiz, on the other. HTC is somewhere in the middle, providing heavy software customizations while staying dev friendly.
Being a CM user, I still can understand why they may be reluctant to embrace alternative ROMs to the fullest, especially when it comes to latest developments and trying to protect IP of those SoCs. But of course there are many little things they can easily do, like opening the bootloader or releasing glue code together with binary blobs.
I do believe the job of supporting S4 is not impossible in the current or even worse state of affairs, but the amount of reverse-engineering and overall complexity may be quite higher than current average maintainer of Samsung CM ports would be happy to handle. Hence we get the fallout of easy-mode devs who expect a fresh 600-page datasheet and code examples for just about everything.
[quote] Oh, and Sony provides all the tools you need to unlock the bootloader. There’s even a simple website with all the info, straight from Sony. Granted, the carrier has the option of removing support for easy-unlocking of the bootloader. But there’s even methods to get around that, all nicely documented. [/quote]
Bull… that website is only for unlocked phones. If you have a carrier locked phone, you are out of luck. Only method is paying for wotan server IF YOUR LUCKY and have a xperia arc s before february last year. If your phone if after that , not even wotan or setools can unlock it.
But hey, its easier to spread bullshit and not actually know what you are talking about, right ?
Mayhaps you should learn to read entire posts before spouting off at the mouth.
I’ve yet to hear of a single Sony-Ericsson or Sony phone that could not be unlocked using the testpoint method at the very least.
Considering I have a 2011 Xperia phone that’s carrier locked, perhaps you should look in the mirror?
Edited 2013-03-20 15:01 UTC
I dont know what you didnt understood … if you dont have your bootloader unlocked , you have to go to the wotan ( paying ) method, which is not easy , not well documented and not always works.
Just because you are deaf, doesnt mean its true.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1754928&page=3 one -> you cannot unlock after “it seems any xperia that is newer than 12W14 cannot be unlocked by OMNIUS. ” as quoted on the site.
http://forum.gsmhosting.com/vbb/f473/st18i-unlock-problem-1508813/ -> We have now reports on newely produced QC8255(T)-based phones (starting from 12W14) are unable to connect using Testpoint.
ok, so , i guess now you have heard.
Try using a thing called “google” or “duckduckgo” ( for the anti google here ). Its nice and you will hear about some more.
You just think you know everything about anything , right ?!
[quote] 2012 LG phones are also surprisingly easy to develop for. In fact, there’s even a free (or $1 donation) app in the Play store to unlock the bootloader on the Optimus G (Freegee app). Does it get any easier than that?
[/quote]
Yes …. tools on playstore for Samsungs to unlock and tools for bootloader unlock and carrier unlock.
If cm team does not support the s4 there will be only photoshoped debloated “custom” roms that are not that custom at all, as they are just modified versions of Samsung stock roms and do not mean that android versions not supported by the manufacturer will be available. If there is no cyanogen mod, there is also no aokp or paranoidandroid as they both build on cyanogenmod. My personal advice is
DON’T BUY SAMSUNG THEY WILL LIE AT YOU LIKE THEY ALREADY HAVE LIED AT US
the thing is that they gave s3 devices to teamhacksung members to port cm to the s3 and promissed to support them where they can. They just did nothing after…
The CyMod team have said they haven’t made any decision yet, and won’t until they get their hands on an S4:
<a href=”https://plus.google.com/117962666888533781522/posts/7jywLJdswki“>…
Being a port maintainer most probably requires one to own the device at least, a top-end and expensive one in the case of S4. I can understand current maintainers questioning whether it makes sense to make that investment themselves.
They may as well be just waiting for free devices from Samsung, or even invites to various conferences, media/entertainment events, etc. All inclusive.
Oh and btw, users are still to make their decision too, of whether custom ROMs would be necessary on S4 at all. One still has to see what Samsung has got in store for their latest flagship. Maybe less bloat and more frequent updates?
yeah , to quote the link :
“Let’s start with the simplest form of this: CyanogenMod does not pre-announce support or lack of support for devices. Ever. Even for the Nexus 4, we did not announce support until a nightly build was available. ”
So , they did this “we wont support thing … ” for every device … but
this time is because Samsung is evil.
Or because this is a bullshit article just to please the Anti-Samsung hyppies that think being anti or pro a company makes them smarter and cooler than other people.
So … this week is what ? I have apple , google and Samsung ?
Do we love Microsoft this week or is it next one ?
The obvious scenario is that Samsung will adopt a unique Samsung OS in the near future. This will either be Tizen or some sort of Android fork. The last thing Samsung would want is a fairly vanilla Android distro running on their flagship devices.
“Update: CyanogenMod on its Google+ account reminds us all that of its official position on the Galaxy S4 — which is to say it doesn’t have one yet. CM also reminds us all that individual developers’ do not speak for CM as a whole. (Which is why the quotes in the following piece are from Team Hacksung and not CyanogenMod.) CM adds that it intends to wait for retail release of the Galaxy S4 before commenting on support, as it does for all new devices.”