Android has evolved much in a relatively short time. Distant are the days in which we saw the first Android, the HTC G1 with a rather poor interface design and a hybrid touch and keyboard. Since then, many who helped create and bring to Android where it is today and gone and others have come to take their place and Android redirect to the current address. Therefore, with this development, many people seem to have trouble distinguishing between a layer of customizing a fork of Android because both change Android, but not in the same way.
But first, we must make a clarification on the definition of fork: A fork is a creation of a project in a different direction from the main or official taking the source code of the existing project and including own code in it. Therefore, and escrictamente speaking, can not be said that there is no real fork of Android , since none of the existing projects arising from Android are taking a radically different way to what Android in its core set. However, and not further complicate the situation more terminology, fork consider as correct term rather than what would actually be: a derivative
Having said all this talk of” fork “of most famous of all Android: Fire OS available at the Fire and Fire HD Phone. As we in another article, Amazon decided to trust his own ecosystem rather than relying on providing Google but does that mean that Fire OS is Android as it really? That is, if we decided to remove all Google services and Android let the bones, so it would be like really?
No, Android is not so in reality. Fire OS, despite being a fork in operability issues, also has a layer of customization to distinguish itself in the most easily identifiable part by users: interface . Beyond enter if that layer is pretty or functional, Fire OS is the example furthest from what Android identified as such, both visually and functionally, however, no longer the operating system developed by Andy Rubin ago almost a decade.
However, Android itself is very famous and quickly identified by many people, so neglecting this asset can be a mistake, and companies like CyanogenMod take advantage of this by giving products with rave reviews as CyanogenMod 12S . Yes, we know that CyanogenMod currently continues with official Google applications installed apart, but the company led by Steve Kondik has reiterated his desire multiple options to distance themselves from Google and its walled garden.
Then there is the other side of the coin: the layers of customization. Within what Google tolerates find many different interpretations of how Android should be as each manufacturer: find the colorful TouchWiz UI Evolution sober Sony, the elegant HTC, Motorola practically nonexistent … all believe be right in a fight that will never be a winner . There will always be supporters and opponents of the different layers, and there may be people who move to defend a different layer, but the conclusion is the same: there will never be a consensus on what should be Android visually, and while there is no consensus, there will continue confusion.
TouchWiz stalled both in the minds of people many ordinary citizens are unaware that Android actually is.
Because, as the saying goes, the devil is in the details , so no There is no clear or simple rule for all cases distinguish between a layer of customization and a fork of Android. Each case must be treated individually, and also depends on the glass from which you look. Android could well be considered as a fork of Linux, and everything that came there would byproducts Android. Perhaps it has not said anything too new, but I assure you that many users are unaware that their walk Kindle tablet, smartphone or even your smartphone Xiaomi Galaxy all have the same operating system.
No comments:
Post a Comment