backtop

Print 46 comment(s) - last by overlandpark4m.. on Jun 28 at 1:51 AM
Android 4.1 is expected to be revealed at Google I/O

When it comes to smartphone operating systems, it appears as though all the major players are preparing updates. Apple recently revealed iOS 6. Microsoft this week took the wraps off Windows Phone 8. Beleaguered RIM is hoping to right its sinking ship with the BlackBerry 10 OS.
 
Not to be left out, Google is readying its follow-up to Android 4.0 “Ice Cream Sandwich”. Google's next operating system release was hinted at today via a slip-up on Google Play. The site listed the Galaxy Nexus smartphone as being available with Android 4.1 "Jelly Bean". The listing also notes that the OS is arriving “soon”, so all signs are pointing to it being announced next week at the Google I/O conference.

 
Nobody knows what Google has planned for the OS update, but we should expect to see Chrome take center stage as the primary browser for Jelly Bean instead of being a seperate download. Given the 4.1 designation for Jelly Bean, don't count on a drastic overhaul of the operating system -- it looks as though we'll have to wait for Android 5.0 for that to happen. 

Source: Droid-Life


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: what was the point of this article?
By amanojaku on 6/21/2012 8:24:36 PM , Rating: 2
The OP asked a legitimate question, I gave a legitimate answer. You don't think the DT staff writes this stuff for fun, do you? It doesn't seem like that to me, anyway. Additionally, I post useful responses. Like this, for example.

http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=24922...

It's not like you have a reputation for the most game-changing comments, either.

This article didn't need to be written. You could say I shouldn't have clicked on it, but how was I supposed to know it wouldn't say anything useful until I read it? I've been a member of DT for six years, but it's slowly going downhill. I'm not the only one who thinks so.
quote:
If you want to have fun come to Daily Tech. If you want informed tech news, Anandtech has your back.
quote:
I am beginning to agree with that. I used to just think people complaining about the lack of integrity at DT as just people whining and/or disagreeing with the opinion of the writer, but the more time goes by, the more I see it.
http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=24990...

I'm not ready to bail on DT just yet, but it's occurred to me a few times. Does that answer your question?


By morphologia on 6/21/2012 9:09:15 PM , Rating: 2
The bottom line is, it's proven newsworthy if people read it. It's vindicated even further if people read it thoroughly, then dissect it in excruciating detail in a manic effort to prove it shouldn't exist. You've proven the worth of the article you claim is worthless.

Anyway, brief preview pieces like this one aren't meant to shake the world, they feed curiosity and provide interesting tidbits to consider. People who take them too seriously just make themselves a sideshow.


RE: what was the point of this article?
By wordsworm on 6/21/2012 9:30:41 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't entirely agree with your assessment. Masher was a joke. Getting rid of him was an improvement. I enjoy reading some of Tiffany's work. She's been around for about a year I think. Kristopher was a good contributor, but I don't see him around any more. Jason has probably gone a bit right wing (to make up for Masher's departure perhaps), but maybe it's just the way his politics are causing him to slide. But, it's not really all that bad. It does provide a bit of entertainment at the end of the day.

As for reputation, I didn't even know I had one.


RE: what was the point of this article?
By Ringold on 6/21/2012 9:54:23 PM , Rating: 2
Masher had, by a mile, I think the most extensive engineering knowledge at DT, and more then most tech websites in general, which tend to be programmer types or just enthusiasts. He was the only one that truly knew what the heck he was talking about on matters like nuclear energy. People simply hated him pointing out flaws and abuses in the global warming science, primarily in the vein of the science can stand on its own but scientists too often warped, manipulated or outright fabricated things to fit their agenda. He also caught a little hate for pointing out the unfortunate facts that renewable energy was a waste of money in a cost-benefit analysis sense, particularly a couple years ago before China started trying to get rich taking Europeans money for subsidized wind and solar equipment and we ended up with a supply glut when hard times trimmed some subsidies.

Might've disagreed with his politics, but his facts were usually straight on: GISS had been turned in to that one guys personal crusade army, and nuclear was, from an engineering perspective, not at all what greens made it out to be.

DT, I think, has been reduced without him. Kristopher being AWOL isn't cool, either.


By wordsworm on 6/22/2012 9:29:43 PM , Rating: 2
Nuclear isn't as clear cut as a lot of folks here wish it was. I'm not sure what expertise he had as an engineer.

There is a lot of abuse in science, I agree. There are a lot of people in the field who believe that they are super intelligent creatures who ought to be given all the milk in the gov'ts teat to keep on doing their research. Give me a billion dollar toy and I'm sure I could do some pretty funky stuff with it, too.

In any event, Jason seems to have picked up the torch after Masher. You, Reclaimer, and Fit, are probably the three most diametrically opposed to my own philosophies in politics. I miss his more speculative writing that he did while Masher was writing.

Nuclear has a lot more going against it than the reds would have you believe. :)


RE: what was the point of this article?
By nafhan on 6/22/2012 8:34:26 AM , Rating: 2
A "legitimate" answer would have been contextually relevant. Your answer provided a self serving avenue for making negative comments about this website... pretty off topic.

I saw Android 4.1 "announcements" across a number of tech websites. So, I'd say that, at minimum, the tech writing community finds this newsworthy.

I almost didn't say anything because I kind of agree with what you're saying (if not how you're doing it), but it's the internet and you're wrong! I'm essentially obligated to say something. :)


RE: what was the point of this article?
By amanojaku on 6/22/2012 9:33:01 AM , Rating: 2
My answer was contextually relevant. The question was "what was the point of this article?" The article said nothing about Android that we didn't already know, namely, that Android 4.1 is expected to debut next week based on a link in Google Play.

Except that it was speculation, and even if it was true, we already saw the Android roadmap last year that said Jelly Bean was to be released in Q2. I'm looking forward to the new release, but at least write an article with hardcore facts. DT is not a blog.

As to how I did it, I don't think I was rude to the OP. Seeing as how the DT staff has kept silent, they either don't care that I insulted them, or feel what I said is true.


By nafhan on 6/22/2012 11:49:21 AM , Rating: 2
That's your context that you were using to frame your discussion of a tangentially related issue. The context of the comment you were responding to would have included at least the rest of the comment, which seemed to indicate that the question was regarding the lack of details of a specific cell phone software update rather than the internal politics of a news blog.

Also, this is about the same amount of actual info that other websites have regarding this issue (and despite the dearth of info, a number of websites are reporting about it). So, not a great example of why DT is so terrible...


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki