# Motorola Complains that Google won't Help it Get ICS. Is the Nexus Program A Good Idea?



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

A great discussion of hardware manufacturers having a hard time 
developing drivers to put ICS on their phones. Should Google help them out?
Is it better to have a whole bunch of ICS devices? 
Or does that defeat the purpose of the pure vanilla phone?

Is the Nexus program bad for Android:

It says in part,
"Last week Motorola went on the record to blame Google's Nexus program
for the delay in software updates on its devices. A device manufacturer trying
to explain delayed software updates is nothing new, but when you're owned by
the the software supplier it's news. It's possible that Motorola is trying to give
the impression that things really won't change much once the purchase is complete
or they want public pressure to support their devices getting preferential treatment from Google;
we'll never know for sure. Regardless, I think it raised some questions about Google's Nexus
strategy and whether or not it has been good for Android as a whole. 
Many of us are somewhat familiar with the development process for creating a ROM for a device.
When a new version of Android is released, developers get to work porting the latest version
over to different devices. One of the obstacles in making a bug-free, stable ROM is
using hardware drivers to run well in the new version. Motorola claims that it's software updates
are delayed because the source code released for Android is built only for the Nexus hardware,
so Android manufacturers have to develop new drivers for their hardware that work.
The process is similar to when PC manufacturers release new drivers for a computer when a
new version of Windows is released. The difference is, when Microsoft releases Windows,
they work with manufacturers before the release to ensure that systems that ran the previous
version will be upgradable. Google only partners with the manufacturer who won the Nexus bid
to develop drivers, meaning the source code is designed explicitly for that device.
The question is, should Google be working with all of its hardware partners to ensure
that when a new version of Android drops they all have device drivers?"


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

I am (almost) speechless at how slow these hardware manufacturers are at updating their devices. I think Motorola, HTC, and the other giants need to hire more or better programmers before they start tossing the blame stick around. The Microsoft reference is complete bull. Microsoft software has spec requirements just like ICS has. (just look at Microsoft's spec requirements for the new Windows 8 Tablets. They go as far as specifying that the tablets MUST have certain hardware buttons on it and other specific hardware in it.) It is up to Motorola to build the drivers to make it all work.


----------



## miketoasty (Jun 10, 2011)

Lunarpancake said:


> I am (almost) speechless at how slow these hardware manufacturers are at updating their devices. I think Motorola, HTC, and the other giants need to hire more or better programmers before they start tossing the blame stick around. The Microsoft reference is complete bull. Microsoft software has spec requirements just like ICS has. It is up to Motorola to build the drivers to make it all work.


This. If you are a software development company, don't be surprised when something new is released and you have to .... Develop software.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

.

I still have driver issues years after windows 7 was released.

.


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

brainfire said:


> .
> 
> I still have driver issues years after windows 7 was released.
> 
> .


And it is up to the hardware manufacturer to build a working driver for Windows 7. Not Microsoft.


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

miketoasty said:


> This. If you are a software development company, don't be surprised when something new is released and you have to .... Develop software.


Yes, but Motorola has to understand that Google is looking to produce the latest and greatest. If their hardware is not compatible or they can not make a driver for their own devices to make it compatible with the new OS then they are SOL. Google still has to compete with Apple and I don't blame them for not giving in to Motorola. Motorola you need to step up your game instead of asking Google to dumb it down for you.


----------



## KeithN (Aug 4, 2011)

And in the end when they decide to blur the aosp android aren't they essentially making their own android distro? If they were making a nexus like device with aosp and paying Google it might be reasonable to ask for help. Does moto seem to be the only ones making such a huge deal about this lately?

Sent from my SCH-I500 using RootzWiki


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

.

But doesn't it make the ROM scene more vibrant
if you have 10 premium devices with ICS? Instead of 1?

.


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

brainfire said:


> .
> 
> But doesn't it make the ROM scene more vibrant
> if you have 10 premium devices with ICS? Instead of 1?
> ...


Well of corse, but would you rather have 1 device running the next gen OS that functions properly has a smooth scrolling interface and is generally great or 20 devices running a half-assed crap-shoot they try to pawn off as a next gen OS?

Motorola needs to stop bitchin' and make a next gen device that can run ICS or put the effort into making ICS run on their current devices. It's sad that they expect Google to hand them a working port of ICS with no effort made on their part. Put in some time and effort and make some money.

Jeez I could rant about this all day long.

Just look at the Razr vs the Galaxy. Release dates were like 1 month apart from each other. Is there a good reason why the Razr was not just built with ICS? There should have been an ICS update for Razr the day after Galaxy was released. Razr users have to wait until April? WHAT!?!? Motorola is like so many other companies out there that still beleive the consumer is not educated enough to realize that they should just wait another month to get something better.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

.

I don't know if we'll ever get a straight answer.
How is Moto having a hard time when college
kids are cranking out 95% functional weekly ROMS?

.


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

brainfire said:


> .
> 
> I don't know if we'll ever get a straight answer.
> How is Moto having a hard time when college
> ...


Exactly my point. If these part-time'ers are putting out working roms for these devices and they full time employees cant release a rom till April then there is something VERY wrong.

Its laughable when you think about it.

These kids are going to class, doing homework, being social, and probably playing some games and they still have time to put out working roms before the company that produced the hardware.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

.

I believe it's some business strategy by the phone 
companies/ Handset makers to increase sales.
But it would sound ridiculous to say it out loud.

So Moto says, "Google won't help us port ICS",
or "The phone companies won't approve our port."
Then VZ says, "We would love to approve the update,
but it hasnt been tested enough."

And we may never know what the real reason is.

.


----------



## Maverick0984 (Oct 14, 2011)

*Actual Solution:* Release less phones, less often, with higher quality and larger increases in tech advances so you don't have to update 12-16 phones accross the big 4 carriers...in the US alone. It is their own fault, stop blaming Google for your own greedy predicament.


----------



## xlinuxtrancex (Jun 18, 2011)

Maverick0984 said:


> *Actual Solution:* Release less phones, less often, with higher quality and larger increases in tech advances so you don't have to update 12-16 phones accross the big 4 carriers...in the US alone. It is their own fault, stop blaming Google for your own greedy predicament.


Precisely.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## idefiler6 (Sep 3, 2011)

Perhaps Motorola can't get past their own locked bootloaders.


----------



## terryrook (Jun 10, 2011)

idefiler6 said:


> Perhaps Motorola can't get past their own locked bootloaders.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RootzWiki

Oh that would be too funny! Motorola doesn't have my trust after years of lies, I blame moto.


----------



## auxiliarypie (Jan 3, 2012)

At first i agreed with Moto, then i read/remembered about all the custom ROM devs...get your shit together Moto. Im with everyone here, each manufacturer needs to slow down the production of new phones and just support whats out there. The iPhone is BEGGING to be competed against, and the OEMs are dropping the ball


----------



## JBirdVegas (Jun 11, 2011)

idefiler6 said:


> Perhaps Motorola can't get past their own locked bootloaders.


Hahahahahahahaha priceless thank you! Just made my night!


----------



## blaineevans (Jul 11, 2011)

tl;dr
Serves 'em right.
/constructivecomment



idefiler6 said:


> Perhaps Motorola can't get past their own locked bootloaders.


I lol'd.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## hille141 (Jul 24, 2011)

Maverick0984 said:


> *Actual Solution:* Release less phones, less often, with higher quality and larger increases in tech advances so you don't have to update 12-16 phones accross the big 4 carriers...in the US alone. It is their own fault, stop blaming Google for your own greedy predicament.


I think this is exactly the direction we are headed. I believe both HTC and Moto have said they will reduce the number of handsets they release per year. HTC has also committed to release to highest quality hardware. Hopefully it is like the EVO release in June 2010 where it blew all the others out of the water for 6 months. The only reason people quit buying them is it reached Sprints EOL.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## yarly (Jun 22, 2011)

Moto is just mad they cant as easily screw up ICS as they could previous Android versions with Blur.


----------



## Lunarpancake (Nov 30, 2011)

But don't you people know?

10 crap gadgets > 3 well made gadgets!!!

I mean, just look at how poorly Apple is doing. (sarcasm) Not saying I love apple but their hardware is very well made and takes more generations of updates than Android devices usually do.


----------



## ScottPilgram (Oct 30, 2011)

I've lost a lot of faith in moto lately, after the OGdroid, a DX, and D3 now that I've had the nexus I have no desire to go back to a moto phone. Now that's not to say that if there's a moto nexus in two years I wouldn't buy it but ever since the OG they've progressively gotten more on my nerves over the years IMO. Between blur and the bootloaders now this they're really starting to annoy me. And as far as the nexus question you raised I truly believe IMHO that ICS on the Nexus is the most polished version of Andy I've seen and I wish that Google would just come out and say ok if your gonna use android that there will be no more skins like sense, blur, and touchwiz and I know the argument that it differentiates various models but I say let your hardware make the difference but I'm sick of these skins and for all we know they(the skins) could be causing the driver issues. Anyway that's just my 2 for what its worth.


----------



## cobjones (Jun 21, 2011)

This is a duplicate post from a front-page news story.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

ScottPilgram said:


> Nexus is the most polished version of Andy I've seen.


I agree.
And i love the openess of the OS even though that may mean dealing with bugs.

.


----------



## cobjones (Jun 21, 2011)

@brainfire. I was just messing with you.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

cobjones said:


> just messing with you


friends?


----------



## WhataSpaz (Feb 20, 2012)

http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/02/20/leaked-screenshots-of-ice-cream-sandwich-for-the-verizon-droid-razr-show-up-online-all-other-details-seemingly-absent/

ICS and Blur actually doesn't look half bad


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

WhataSpaz said:


> ICS and Blur actually doesn't look half bad


Agreed. I miss swipe left on contact for history (Calls, texts). Was it blur? GB?

.


----------



## yarly (Jun 22, 2011)

WhataSpaz said:


> http://www.androidpo...emingly-absent/
> 
> ICS and Blur actually doesn't look half bad


Until you see the other rumored screenshots of ICS Moto Blur

http://cdn.androidcentral.com/sites/androidcentral.com/files/imagecache/w550h500/postimages/108579/motorola-intel-ics.jpg


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

yarly said:


> Until you see the other rumored screenshots of ICS Moto Blur


That's just bad wallpaper?


----------



## WhataSpaz (Feb 20, 2012)

yarly said:


> Until you see the other rumored screenshots of ICS Moto Blur
> 
> http://cdn.androidce...a-intel-ics.jpg


Haha I saw that before, obvs fake imo


----------



## yarly (Jun 22, 2011)

WhataSpaz said:


> That's just bad wallpaper?


Yeah, if you remove the wallpaper, it's probably more like the other screens.


----------



## nklenchik (Dec 1, 2011)

I can only speak for myself but to be honest I can't remember the last time I used a stock launcher with a phone haha


----------



## Tidbits (Aug 1, 2011)

Lunarpancake said:


> At first i agreed with Moto, then i read/remembered about all the custom ROM devs...get your shit together Moto. Im with everyone here, each manufacturer needs to slow down the production of new phones and just support whats out there. The iPhone is BEGGING to be competed against, and the OEMs are dropping the ball


When a manufacturer releases a device they have already done most of the legwork. Most devs take most of the items manufacturers have to work for and add to it or change things. Look at CyanogenMod for example. They are starting to roll out RCs and nothing is set in stone, and they are still waiting for drivers and such to be released from manufacturers.

It would honestly be a different story if these part time devs didn't have those luxuries. Look at Slayher for example when the Thunderbolt came out. He had to write his own RIL. People kept crying and moaning about it on days on end. Took him a few months just for the RIL, and imagine if he had to do his own drivers, his own kernel and such. Just think about it.

Now I agree with Motorola somewhat, but I also disagree somewhat as well. I don't want to do a huge essay about it as most will probably not want to read about it, and I would rather not write one either.


----------



## frankydroid (Jun 17, 2011)

Tidbits said:


> When a manufacturer releases a device they have already done most of the legwork. Most devs take most of the items manufacturers have to work for and add to it or change things. Look at CyanogenMod for example. They are starting to roll out RCs and nothing is set in stone, and they are still waiting for drivers and such to be released from manufacturers.
> 
> It would honestly be a different story if these part time devs didn't have those luxuries. Look at Slayher for example when the Thunderbolt came out. He had to write his own RIL. People kept crying and moaning about it on days on end. Took him a few months just for the RIL, and imagine if he had to do his own drivers, his own kernel and such. Just think about it.
> 
> Now I agree with Motorola somewhat, but I also disagree somewhat as well. I don't want to do a huge essay about it as most will probably not want to read about it, and I would rather not write one either.


He isn't a team of individuals that work fulltime doing programming specifically for Android tho 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RootzWiki


----------



## thatguy188 (Sep 28, 2011)

Tidbits said:


> He isn't a team of individuals that work fulltime doing programming specifically for Android tho
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RootzWiki


Exactly! There's a huge difference between 1 person working on something for lets say 2-3 hours a day compared to (at least should be) a room full of 5-6+ extremely skilled full time programmers who know android like the back of their hand working at least 8 hours every day.

Motorola just likes to play the blame game for their slow releases.


----------



## RageXicity (Aug 12, 2011)

If HTC/Moto/Sammy/LG didnt feel the need to change everything about the phone just to be different. If they leave it stock they wouldnt need google's help


----------



## DHO (Nov 6, 2011)

Cannot be that hard to build the ICS drivers for existing devices. A half dozen devs are supporting Bionic/Razor/Crespo 4G/ Inc/ Passion/Stingray/wingray/crespo (3G)

Just going out a limb. if they do it for free in their spare time. Getting paid to work on it all week should be a breeze!


----------



## Tidbits (Aug 1, 2011)

thatguy188 said:


> Exactly! There's a huge difference between 1 person working on something for lets say 2-3 hours a day compared to (at least should be) a room full of 5-6+ extremely skilled full time programmers who know android like the back of their hand working at least 8 hours every day.
> 
> Motorola just likes to play the blame game for their slow releases.


CyanogenMod has more developers than that and THEY are waiting for bits from the manunfacturers to release bits... Who's to say manufacturers are waiting for the same bits from their suppliers? I remember the Cliq Motorola went on record they are waiting for drivers from their supplier 6months later 2.1 was released. People ranted and cried and cried. A lot of people are doing the same to CyanogenMod team.
I like CyanogenMod very much and they are the best example to compare to what can and does happen to manufacturers.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## JBirdVegas (Jun 11, 2011)

Tidbits said:


> CyanogenMod has more developers than that and THEY are waiting for bits from the manunfacturers to release bits... Who's to say manufacturers are waiting for the same bits from their suppliers? I remember the Cliq Motorola went on record they are waiting for drivers from their supplier 6months later 2.1 was released. People ranted and cried and cried. A lot of people are doing the same to CyanogenMod team.
> I like CyanogenMod very much and they are the best example to compare to what can and does happen to manufacturers.
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


CyanogenMod has zero full time or paid devs only a gerrit website that anyone in the world can submit to. Anyone who takes on a project for the cm team does it in their personal free time. The reason the community has been producing working roms for lots of devices is we want to support our old devices. Phone companies want to put resources into NEW expensive stuff not old already paid for stuff.


----------



## deaffob (Aug 16, 2011)

I read several posts in this thread and I don't think most of you(or all) realize that Motorola is having problems with building drivers from the ground. I see many of you say we have wonderful developers developing this rom or that, but just from seeing people comparing developing ROMs or MODs to actually developing hardware drivers, I can see that people who are blaming Motorola have really no idea what it is to develop hardware drivers from the ground up.

Cyannogen team and all other XDA developers develop ROMs or themes and also add little functions here and there but all of that is laughable compared to actually developing hardware drivers. I would imagine that Motorola or Samsung full time developers would make working themed OS in a few days.

There are 20,000 people working at Google. Samsung and Motorola have probably more people working(I know Samsung does have a lot more employees than 20,000) and do you really think that full-time developers working for these corporates are like kids who learned programing from their undergrad college or from their father, friend?

The coders that are working at these companies have experiences that would make 99% of the so called internet developers like midgets. If you want to blame the OEMs, you should probably know why they are having such a hard time releasing timely updates.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

JBirdVegas said:


> Phone companies want to put resources into NEW expensive stuff not old already paid for stuff


Would love to get your feedback on this:

Moto says, "Google won't help us port ICS",
or "The phone companies won't approve our port."
Then VZ says, "We would love to approve the update,
but it hasnt been tested enough."

Whose fault is the delay? 
Is Motorola really incapable of building the drivers? 
Could it be a business strategy by the phone
companies/ Handset makers to increase sales?


.​


----------



## jr313 (Jun 10, 2011)

The nexus program is a great idea! If not we would only have crap skins over the true android platform to choose from and i can live without sense, touchwiz, and especially BLUR. And as far as Moto complaining the need to step up the developing game since everyone raves about their awesome hardware and build quality, i havent heard HTC complaining nor any other manufacturer for that matter just another way to pass the blame on why their consumer has to wait for updates. First Verizon now Google. SMH. MAN UP MOTO! Or get out the game. Js


----------



## JBirdVegas (Jun 11, 2011)

@brainfire neither side will ever be happy with the other. Samsung and moto are hardware and experienced software designers yes ics brings new hurtles but its a huge update and the learning curve is steep this time around. I'm sure they are mad Google didn't provide enough help or maybe the dev just said make the Google guy do it one too many times. Who knows. Yes it is complex high level code, but they a for profit international software companies so I don't favor the opinion they just can't do it.

To be honest that's just my 2¢

I know for a fact that OS ota updates cost both the carrier and the manufacturer a lot of money.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

JBirdVegas said:


> Samsung and moto are hardware and experienced software designers so I don't favor the opinion they just can't do it.


What reason would motorola have for not porting ICS?
Wouldn't it be a great selling point to say, "All our top tier phones have ICS!"
Is there some reason google would hold back code to prevent that?

.​


----------



## JBirdVegas (Jun 11, 2011)

I don't think they are with holding anything but someone will have to back port omap3 hardware drivers for ics. This is where most in the community are having issues

Edit ics was designed for omap4


----------



## Joel S (Dec 20, 2011)

deaffob said:


> I read several posts in this thread and I don't think most of you(or all) realize that Motorola is having problems with building drivers from the ground. I see many of you say we have wonderful developers developing this rom or that, but just from seeing people comparing developing ROMs or MODs to actually developing hardware drivers, I can see that people who are blaming Motorola have really no idea what it is to develop hardware drivers from the ground up.
> 
> Cyannogen team and all other XDA developers develop ROMs or themes and also add little functions here and there but all of that is laughable compared to actually developing hardware drivers. I would imagine that Motorola or Samsung full time developers would make working themed OS in a few days.
> 
> ...


This rant is all well and good, but there are thousands of hardware manufacturers who have to build drivers from the ground up for PC's. Don't forget people building their own Linux drivers.

Its complex, time consuming work, but whining about it while still producing crap code is unacceptable. If a college student can build drivers to support complex computer systems, phone oems should be able to as well.

Phone makers are trying to cash in on the smart phone boom, but they have yet to optimize their staffing to handle the demands of supporting what is essentially a compact computer.

Thrown off of a structure of moderate height.


----------



## printing724 (Aug 8, 2011)

Interesting thread. I apologize for this long post, but have to get this off my chest. Google and the OEM's are missing a very big boat here.

I've had three Samsung phones now. First was Omnia (WP). I spent lots of time flashing because I was looking for "the latest OS update as close to stock as possible that runs on my hardware". Then the Fascinate (Android). I spent lots of time flashing because I was looking for "the latest OS update as close to stock as possible that runs on my hardware". Is there a pattern here?

Now I got a Gnex a week ago. It has "the latest OS update as close to stock as possible that runs on my hardware". Guess what? I haven't even rooted it yet because it just works. This phone is everything I spent 18 months trying to get the Fascinate to be (I know I'll be rooting it eventually, but don't feel the need just yet). This experience brings me to suggest the following to Google...

AN OPEN LETTER/PROPOSAL TO GOOGLE

Here is what you should do to combat Android fragmentation, get the OEM's under control, and start breaking the carrier stranglehold on the non-Apple segment of the phone market without pissing everyone off.

Institute a voluntary certification program for new phones. You could call it "AOSP Prime Certification", or "Nexus Compatibility Certification" or some other catchy name.

The OEM's can continue to sell the phones with whatever skin they feel necessary to differentiate and add the bloatware required by their carrier customers. But to be eligible for this certification, the OEM must provide two tools for the end user. First, a simple method for the end user to switch the phone to run on stock unbloated Android. Second, a simple method for the end user to restore the phone to as-purchased (skinned and bloated) configuration.

To become certified, the OEM sends you a decent sample of pre-production phones. You run a publicly defined series of tests on a predetermined number of phones chosen from that sample lot to make sure everything works. If it does, the phone is certified under the program for the version of Android applied for. The OEM and carrier can now advertise that certification.

To address warranty concerns, the OEM's and carriers could be clear that warranty and free tech support will not be extended to phones not running the original as-purchased OS. To obtain that support, the user first has to restore the phone. With enough disclaimers built into the conversion to stock Android process, no one will be able to claim that they didn't know what they were getting into.

Initially, response will be slow. The OEM's (and their carrier customers) will not jump on this willingly as it could in the long term jeopardize elements of their current business model. But over time, enough consumers will want the security of knowing that they don't have to be dependent on the OEM's and carriers for updates that I predict these phones with this certification will be perceived as having added value and will become quite popular.

This program will cost very little to develop and implement. It might need to be kickstarted with a couple of Moto phones. If I'm wrong and they are duds, drop it. If I'm right, this could be huge. And the whole thing is voluntary, so your OEM partners and their carrier customers won't have anything they can snivel about. And you'll be demonstrating your commitment to the Android vision I think you had when you first introduced it.

At least think about it.


----------



## mattnphuron (Dec 29, 2011)

idefiler6 said:


> Perhaps Motorola can't get past their own locked bootloaders.


This made me laugh out loud

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## mattnphuron (Dec 29, 2011)

Maybe I could agree with moto a little but doesn't the razr and nexus have almost identical hardware. The phone built for ICS has the same guts as the razr so it can't be that hard. Maybe older devices moto has a little point. Just my two cents

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## mentose457 (Aug 26, 2011)

Wonder why HTC and samsung aren't complaining about it being so hard?


----------



## yarly (Jun 22, 2011)

mentose457 said:


> Wonder why HTC and samsung aren't complaining about it being so hard?


They didn't hire developers that ride the short bus


----------



## WhataSpaz (Feb 20, 2012)

mentose457 said:


> Wonder why HTC and samsung aren't complaining about it being so hard?


TWSS


----------



## jellybellys (Apr 3, 2012)

One of these days Motorola will come begging to the developers at Rootzwiki asking for help


----------



## Tidbits (Aug 1, 2011)

A lot of their devices take 8+ months to get updates. Regardless if they complain or not is irrelevant to me as they must be having trouble with the way people claim part time devs are more efficient or capable of doing things in a short time...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## Mustang302LX (Jun 28, 2011)

Alright guys lets keep it clean and not offensive.


----------



## piratebot (Jan 12, 2012)

easy solution. stop buying shitty moto or htc phones. only buy the nexus series. if enough poeple stop buying into the bullshit the ship will have to go a different direction. these companies are driven by money. when money talks corps listen. that is all.


----------



## GoBears (Dec 11, 2011)

Moto's been doing NOTHING but making excuses and pointing fingers since the fiasco known as the Bionic. They pissed on all the people that supported them and bought that PoS by releasing the Razr soon after. They should have been concentrating on fixing the Bionic before worrying about the Razr. I am just so glad I am done with them and locked bootloaders for a long while. I personally hate all the skins that OEMs ruin android with so NEXUS and vanilla ICS FTW!


----------



## mentose457 (Aug 26, 2011)

Mustang302LX said:


> Alright guys lets keep it clean and not offensive.


My funny post is gone...


----------



## collierclark (Dec 2, 2011)

I had ics on my dx before the nexus dropped on Verizon. Ijs.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## jeff5891 (Nov 15, 2011)

What I would like to know is why is it so easy for developers on rootz to port ics to other phones like the razer with different hardware but so hard for Motorola to put out its own version. I really think the problem has to be with their overlay on the system which would really make it their fault for slow updates and not Google's.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RootzWiki


----------



## yarly (Jun 22, 2011)

jeff5891 said:


> What I would like to know is why is it so easy for developers on rootz to port ics to other phones like the razer with different hardware but so hard for Motorola to put out its own version. I really think the problem has to be with their overlay on the system which would really make it their fault for slow updates and not Google's.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RootzWiki


The developers on the forums don't have PHBs lording over their every action. It's pretty obvious many of the earlier implementations of Blur and things like the locking of their phones most likely came out of "groupthink" meetings headed by such people. Thankfully Google canned the last CEO of Moto and brought in their own guy now.


----------



## redsox 98 (Jun 6, 2011)

I don't know if it's been said yet but moto is bad for android! As a matter of fact all oem's that put there skin on a android phone are bad for android. Those oem's want 1 thing and that is to sell you there latest greatest phone a week after you bought there last latest greatest phone. Apple does 1 thing right and that is they make there phones and they update all there phones. Hell the 3g is running the same os as the 4s as the 5 will be whenever it comes out. I will never own a android phone that is not a nexus because I want android to decide my eol not some oem so they can sell me the razr maxx 2 weeks after I bought the razr.


----------



## brainfire (Jan 10, 2012)

jeff5891 said:


> What I would like to know is why is it so easy for developers on rootz to port ics to other phones like the razer


I believe the roms we use are tweaks of the underlying code.
Go to the razr section and see the lack of action.
Creating drivers to port aosp is much harder.

.​


----------

