Honeycomb will require Dual Core CPU

[miffed]

For me , this renders the Galaxy Tab pointless ! ....and any other single core Android tablet for that matter

To be fair , its not like Google didn't try to warn them .

http://www.droid-life.com/2011/01/03...or-galaxy-tab/

[hecatae]

going to wait for Google to claim otherwise, similar specs were given for Gingerbread

[Hands0n]

This is an interesting development / bit of speculation. This pretty much suggests that Honeycomb will not run on any of today's handsets either (with the possible exception of the LG Optimus 2X dual core handset that came out late last year). Only time will tell.

I am hardly surprised. There is something about Android and its current raft of hardware that leaves me gasping for breath. It is almost there, but really not quite. The sheer amount of problems caused by the hardware struggling to keep up with the OS is frustrating. Not that anyone I know of who has an Android complains. They all seem oblivious of these little things that I notice on every single Android handset I have ever owned or handled to date, bar none! But then my expectations are set somewhat high through my daily experience with the iPhone 4 (and the 3GS before it). These two devices UI operations are completely slick and highly responsive to a degree that Android has yet to demonstrate to me.

And so we are promised a more efficient operation under Gingerbread - that has yet to be seen. Honeycomb a proposition allegedly for handsets and tablets has yet to show itself, so I guess there will be the usual preamble of wild speculation. Google aren't going to let too much go yet.

Dual core CPU becomes the minimum spec for Android 3.0 onwards? I don't suppose that I am alone in seeing the parallels with PCs already. Meanwhile, battery technology struggles to keep up with single-core 1GHz processors!!

I do believe that I am beginning to despair for Android, ever such a little.

[Ben]

Oh this is probably entirely the wrong place to post this, but as Hands0n is having a little poke at Android

HTC Evo vs iPhone 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAOtC9QfXac&sns=fb

Rather liberal use of the F word, so probably NSFW

In my opinion a mobile device, be it handset or tablet, shouldn't need a dual-core CPU. Damn, we ran full on PCs capable of some incredible things on a single core for as long as anyone can remember and, lets face it, they coped really well. The OSs that run on our mobile devices should be so weedy, so lightweight that they could run on a Casio calculator yet alone a 1GHz Snapdragon Whatsamadoodah. Ok, maybe a slight exaggeration, but my point is that if an iPad can be Insanely Great® on one core than Google just aren't trying hard enough.

Since I mentioned the iPad; yes it does have performance issues, but in the RAM department.

[gorilla]

Let me just preface this post by stating that I'm completely won over by the iPad

While the above is probably true, I'm sure the devs at XDA or modaco will bring out their own 3.0 custom ROM for the Galaxy tab! Yes, this shouldn't be the case, but if you buy a device that runs a mobile phone OS then that's what you get.

I'm running 2.3 on my Desire and I have to say that it's pretty sweet, if the Galaxy Tab gets a 2.3 upgrade, then I think it will still be a very competent device.

Having bought the iPad on a whim, I am not inclined to rush out and buy an Android tablet any time soon. I do want one, but I fancy the proper official google tablets will be similarly priced to the iPad and thus pointless in my opinion.

This is what I want: a £200 (or less) 10" tablet with front facing camera and read / write memory slot.

I think that google do need to get stricter with Android and force manufacturers down the standards route.

[hecatae]

http://www.gsmarena.com/android_24_l...-news-2202.php

Android 2.4 on a single core Xperia Arc

[Ben]

Good news that there are, supposedly, performance improvements.

That said, I doubt this has any bearing on Android 3.0 and its requirements. One would expect the 2.x series to continue working with most current phones - 3.0 would, I'd have thought, be a suitable time to mandate a spec change.

[hecatae]

2.3 and 2.4 will be Gingerbread, just like 2.0 and 2.1 are Eclair.

the Xperia Arc is meant to be upgradeable to Android 3.0, and it's only Single Core

[hecatae]

This tweet from Dan Morrill, Android Open Source & Compatibility Tech lead, means more than meets the eye.

http://twitter.com/#!/morrildl/status/22845294886518785

Random note: there's no hard minimum processor requirement for Honeycomb. Trust me, if there were I'd know.

[The Mullet of G]

Its great to see the tide finally start to turn for Android and people are beginning to see it for what it is. I mostly lambasted it from the sidelines until recently when I acquired an HTC Desire, only to realise Android is indeed everything I said that it was. Honeycomb? Dual Core CPU's? None of that matters to be honest, Google can roll out new versions until the cows come home, but until they fix the fragmentation it wont really make any difference. Also like Hands0n mentioned the hardware always seems to be wrestling with the OS and often fighting a losing battle, I'll again point towards comparisons with Symbian.

Build quality is also another issue that a lot of Android handsets fall down on, a complete lack of attention to detail. For me some of the worst offenders are HTC and Samsung, a lot of people will disagree regarding HTC, but having tried most of their current offerings they are marred by horrible attempts at cost savings in the worst possible places, most notably the insistence on combining metal with outrageously cheap grade plastic.

[Ben]

All very true re: lack of attention to detail and cost saving. That said, those lower cost Android handsets are definitely bringing smartphones to the mass market, so I can forgive HTC and Samsung to a certain extent. They're all still poor man's iPhone's, though, IMHO

But Android 3.0 is needed, fragmentation and bloating or not. It's the Windows of the phone and tablet world, or is, at least, likely to be, and a part of me is still very much in favour of this development while there's still enough competition out there to keep everybody honest.

[Hands0n]

Yes, I think that we need Android to drive the smartphone market despite the mobile network operators protestations. Android has enabled significant technical sophistication at a price that would have been unthinkable even 12 months ago. Certainly unattainable. Yet now we have sub-£100 smartphones that are not a lot less capable than the £500 monster Androids that exist - I'm thinking ZTE Blade here.

I think that the fragmentation of Android is inevitable given that its somewhat anarchic roots.

[The Mullet of G]

I'm all for lowering costs, but there is never an excuse for using selection box plastic on your top of the range handset costing almost £500. There is even less excuse for poor quality speakers and camera etc. If Nokia can stick an awesome set of speakers on a phone costing less than £100 then its unacceptable that a phone costing 4 or 5 times as much should sound terrible, or be in mono for that matter.

Android isn't doing anything now that Symbian S60v5 wasn't doing on sub £100 phones more than 12 months ago, it even did it at a similarly sluggish pace. Likewise there was also very little difference between high end and low end models in terms of performance. Heck, short of Starting an Android Foundation only to later disband and also calling their market place ivO they couldn't possibly tread the path of failure any closer. Maybe Android will eventually see light at the end of the tunnel in some sort of Symbian^3 style rebirth, I doubt its Honeycomb 3.0 though.