OK, so is there any means to dual boot android/android? iphone can do it, why not android? I would like to chose between cyanogen/htc stock on the fly for emulation purposes. is this possible without having to set up all my nonsense?
unlikely =\
windows mobile and the iphone can not technically dualboot android, they use a program to clear all of the memory in order to boot android ontop of windows mobile/Iphone OS (haret), therefore the original operating system is no longer running and resources are devoted to the new virtual one running
android doesn't currently have a function similar to haret I far as I know (I'm rather new to android)
Its not impossible but as far as I can tell, it hasn't been done yet...
So I have a smart phone running the Android platform and I know there is an x86 Android project to run it on a full desktop/laptop system.
I also found a DosBox app for it, which I haven't tried but I hear people have gotten Windows 3.11/95 to work on.
Also with the webtop on my phone it can run a full Debian Linux install.
My question is in two parts:
A. Has anyone tried to port this to other mobile phones (Windows, RIM, iOS, etc...) yet?
B. Has anyone tried to port any other OS's to Android?
I mentioned iOS specifically in A. because some MacFans really like their OS and might not want to give up that functionality and it might make people more willing to adopt the platform.
I'd have posted links to cite references, but I'm still under restriction for being new.
Experts, Developers, Fellow Gentlemen (& perhaps, some Lassey?),
PURPOSE:
To request, collect, organize, and clearly present 3 types of information related to BOTH android application development (for sale on the market) and ROM cooking (using scripts, kitchens, etc.).
INFO REQUESTED:
(1) Compare the relative the PROs and CONs of Android Dev. using:
Windows with Cygwin and Eclipse
Windows with a Linux VM (Eclipse installed on the VM)
Mac with Eclipse
Mac with a Linux VM (Eclipse installed on the VM)
Linux on bare metal (using Eclipse, of course, or the NDK)
(2) If you have used two or more of the above for Android Dev., please describe your experiences and insights, the primary differences, similarities, tips and pitfalls, etc.
(3) Given a fairly large budget to buy your own laptop for use in Android application development and ROM cooking, please RANK the above 5 choices in order from your 1st (best and most desirable) choice to your 5th (last and least desirable) configuration.
Best Regards,
Paul
Honestly your best bet if you want to do android ROM development, and not developing apks, then your best bet is to dual boot your laptop with widows and ubuntu. I thouhgt that you were wanting to develop apks, since you mentioned the SDK and eclipse, that is really more for app development, rather than ROMS and android open source it self.
The reason for ubuntu is that all the of utilities all work with ubuntu, they can work with other distros, but ubuntu seems to be the one most flock to.
The reason not to use a VM is because it can have issues connecting to the USB connection with your phone attached.
Mac will work, if you really want to go down that path, but it is more cumbersome to get things to work "well" as BSD is the underlying kernel, but you have to install an Xwindows environment to use most of the Android utilities, and that can be a pain to get working for someone not really experienced with linux AND OS X.
Windows with cygwin is a possibility, but again, more of a pain that just dual booting ubuntu.
+1 for dualboot
I'm definitely not a developer but I do know PC's. Jim's right you won't get any odd b.s. if you partition and install Ubuntu.
For the small amount of rom tweaking/developing I have done I use windows with cygwin. With baksmali and smali for decompiling dex files.
Sent from my MB865 using xda premium
Me too. I get by with Windows7 and Cygwin...
I know that I will eventually have to at least set up dual-boot with Ubuntu if I want to get involved in "real" development (even that would freak out my wife though - having options at boot on our shared family computer... gonna need a separate dev machine I guess)
Sent from my mind using XDA
I have worked through both windows and linux (ubuntu mostly), and I can give you some info about macs too, but I don't have actual experience there.
Windows
Pros:
More software for things other than android development, so if you want just one OS it may be the way to go.
If you are familiar with it already, it will make your life easier as you won't have to learn about a new OS.
Not much more really.
Cons:
most developers use linux, so you will be a bit alone i the android dev world meaning possible less support.
Not as well supported officially or not.
Overall:
Windows will probably be just fine for app development, as the sdk and eclipse both run fine.
You will have trouble with rom development. Android is based on the linux kernel, so it does not play well with windows.
You can use Cygwin, but you will have mixed results. It is not perfect. Some things just won't work unless you have linux, and quite honestly it is probably easier to get ubuntu working right.
Ubuntu
Pros:
It's FREE!!!!!
most official support
It's what most devs use, so unofficial support is good
Most utilities are built for it.
Cons:
Can be tough to learn if you are used to windows
not as many apps for other things, but that is getting better.
Over all:
By far the best for development. you are just gonna be better off in general. your best bet is to dual boot, which is really easy, and you can always use windows when you want. A virtual machine is an option, but you will have issues with certain things, like usb support. A VM will also require more cpu power to do everything so it is not a good idea on low power machines.
Hardware
Linux is much lighter than windows, so a low power computer will be better off with it.
You should be fine with anything that is not total crap for app development. Basic rom development should be fine in the mid to low end. If you are getting into more serious stuff like building up android source you will want some serious power. I have 4GB or ram and an intel i3 processor (2.13 gHZ dual core 4 thread) and that barely cuts it. compiling cm7 takes a couple hours and it runs at 100% cpu usage the whole time and gets hotter than hell.
You will need a pretty big hard drive for some stuff. The AOSP source is huge. all my android stuff takes about 28GB.
Over all
your best bet is to dual boot windows and Ubuntu Linux on at least a decent PC. you will be happier with something with a slightly higher end CPU.
I use 64-bit Ubuntu, it's just so much better and everything just runs natively! I mean some of those kitchens and tools are only for windows, but it doesn't really bother me because I dont use them
If you want to learn to write code, get ubuntu and jump head first into it.
I have searched lots on the subject of getting a full linux distro running on an android device most of which were really not really what I am looking for, almost everything I find on the subject seems to be some kind of hybrid solution where running linux side by side or on top of android but imo that just seems messy and may as well just be using andorid with it's apps than do that.
I ran into interesting information about modding chromebooks some of when were the similar side-by-side solution but others actually more what I was looking for, they enable legacy seabios while not enough to get windows installed seems to work fine to boot into linux and another guy had baked his own custom seabios replacing the chrome bios entirely.
my question, the atom tablets Im seeing pop up a few places are standard x86 right ? is it possible to either
1/run a modded sea bios similar to chromebook mods? then boot a stock ubuntu distro installation maybe from external storage?
2/or somehow have the existing/modded bootloader boot linux kernel/ubuntu install ?
can't help think if it were that simple maybe someone would have done it already but also thinking the hardware (drivers) are supported by android so they should be supported by linux right ? and if it is standard x86 can't be too much a stretch right ?
I don't own an atom tablet but was thinking it may be desirable (and add more use) if I could get a full linux distro installed and be a lot more affordable than full fledged windows based tablet.
anyway thanks
ps:that captcha is harcore
They are kinda standard. But they are not following PC architecture. They are so called Intel MID (Mobile Internet Device). On such devices you may find neither EFI nor ACPI. They have so called SFI which is a complete disaster. But Intel Merrifield is more or less supported by upstream kernel and Yocto (thanks to Intel Edison platform). You may try to gather information about those devices (official name of SoC is Intel Atom Z34xx).
I have wondered this for a very long time
Why isn't there any phone hardware which exists (that I'm aware of) where you can simply install any OS you like without jumping through hoops?
I'm referring to something similar to a PC. When you build a PC, it is all standard hardware and you can load any os you want on it, endless flavors of linux, current or old versions of windows, etc. It is simple. Both windows and linux can generally detect all your hardware and install drivers, it is simple.
With phones however it seems you are always limited. You have to find ways to root them, usually requiring exploiting some vulnerability. Hope the bootloader is unlocked. Assuming you aren't a talented developer (like most typical people), you then must search for roms for the phone, usually made by various people on forums sites or similar. It is a big mess. Or if you don't customize it, your stuck with some bloated os that the manufacturer will fail to update.
I don't understand why phones are such a mess like this, and why you can't just buy an OS-less phone, and simply install vanilla android, or any other standardized open source os on it, similar to how things work on a PC?
There aren't any unified standard in the embedded devices in general and in phones in particular. The reason that you can install compatible OS on the PC is because IBM PC is a standard, which specifies how the PC should boot, where to search for the bootloader, what kind of partition table should be on the HDD, how the devices should be connected, how to probe for the hardware, how software should use hardware, and lots of other things.
In embedded word, there aren't such standard. Until recently, every System-on-Chip used its own boot specifications and bootloaders incompatible with each other. Only in the last 2 years something started to change in a better way.