Reiterating what the company has been saying about Android 4.0, Google's Dan Morrill said today that the Ice Cream Sandwich source code would be made available to the general public "soon," after the software begins appearing on new and existing Android devices.

The source code for Android 3.0 was never made available - Google's official reasoning for this is that it didn't want the tablet-oriented Honeycomb code running on smaller screens, though others have suggested (as we noted in our review of the Xoom) that Honeycomb seemed to be a bit rushed at the time of release. Most of the focus on Ice Cream Sandwich so far has concerned what it will do for phones, but for tablets it's likely to represent an iteration of Honeycomb with more polish and fewer rough edges.

The lack of Honeycomb source code has been criticized by the open source community, which often takes advantage of Android's "openness" relative to iOS or Windows Phone 7 to develop custom Android distributions for all kinds of devices, including some (like the HP TouchPad) for which it was never really intended. Once its source code is released, Ice Cream Sandwich should give these developers a more modern and robust platform to start from.

Source: Ars Technica

POST A COMMENT

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • piiman - Friday, October 21, 2011 - link

    yeah but this stupid troll is complaining about the version name. Hey Troll how do you know what I really need and don't really need and do you really think people pick a phone OS based on the version name? Do you prefer MS's fruity names? Or do you just like Apple's <-- either the fruit or the company Reply
  • seamonkey79 - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    That was more my point than pointing out anything specific about the usage. The people that want to use the phone more are going to be able to figure out Android, and the same people that want to use the phone more are going to figure out the iPhone. The fact is that it's the PERSON using the device that decides whether it's usable or not, NOT the OS that's on the device. If I had an iPhone, I would use it more/better/easier than my mom and sister, and so forth, because I would want to use it more.

    That being said, my sister with the iPhone went from an HTC Droid Eris to the iPhone 4, and I do here her ask people (not me, she knows better than that) why it doesn't do stuff that her HTC did, but that's just the way things work when something is advertised as magical and having everything.
    Reply
  • doobydoo - Friday, October 21, 2011 - link

    Interesting, my sister went from an HTC Droid to an iPhone 4. I do 'here' her asking people why the HTC Droid was so laggy, slow, had fewer apps and the battery died so fast.

    She said she could understand why iPhone was labelled 'magical' when compared to a piece of turd.
    Reply
  • bupkus - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    Seems reasonable. :~O Reply
  • augiem - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    It's marketing, plain and simple. It gives some friendly character to an otherwise bland thing such as an operating system revision. Just like Siri gives a personality to a speech recognition tool. Average people can identify with it. Marketing win. Irritating to vulcans. Reply
  • Booster - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    I mean, I suppose I could live with Mango even though it's exactly the same gimmick. But to come to think of it, why do Google and MS need to candy-coat their OSes like that? Winphone 7's first iteration sucked bigtime, with Mango aiming to sweeten things up. But what's the point of this ice cream stuff? Reply
  • nuudles - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    Ice cream sandwich is just google's code name for the next version of Android. Officially it will be known as Android 4.0. Much like Intel called the first i7 chips Nehalem and the latest ones are Sandy Bridge evem though it simply says on the box i7. Similarly what we call Bulldozer is sold as AMD FX 8150, etc.

    No need to get so worked up about a name, if you simply don't like Android then that's your right, I am yet to meet someone who does not love Gingerbread (that's 2.3 if you prefer official names) or Honeycomb (3.0-3.2). Yes they have their faults but given the capabilities and the steady improvements over time I can live with the little niggles.
    Reply
  • seamonkey79 - Thursday, October 20, 2011 - link

    I find it kind of fun.

    I don't know what 1.0 and 1.1 were codenamed, but

    1.5 = Cupcake
    1.6 = Donut
    2.0/2.1 = Eclair
    2.2 = Froyo
    2.3 = Gingerbread
    3.0-3.2 = Honeycomb
    4.0 = Ice Cream Sandwich
    5.0 = 'Jelly Bean'
    n.n = 'Kiwifruit' or something of the sort

    it is merely a fun/clever way to give some character to their product. If it were down to names counting how much I like it, then I would have hated 2.2 and 3.0, whereas they were both very effective (at the time) revisions.

    No different than anything else in the computer world having a codename :-)
    Reply
  • retrospooty - Friday, October 21, 2011 - link

    1.5 = Cupcake
    1.6 = Donut
    2.0/2.1 = Eclair
    2.2 = Froyo
    2.3 = Gingerbread
    3.0-3.2 = Honeycomb
    4.0 = Ice Cream Sandwich
    5.0 = 'Jelly Bean'

    All that's fine for internal names, but seriously, Cyanogen is an awesome name. Not only a great name for tech, its a great word by itself. Say it a few times and you'll see what I mean.
    Reply
  • piiman - Friday, October 21, 2011 - link

    Why does it bother you so much? I think you have issues. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now