×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Final Android 3.0 SDK Released

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the goes-to-eleven dept.

Android 31

teh31337one writes "Google has released the SDK for their tablet OS, Android 3.0 'Honeycomb.' Google states on its developers' blog that the APIs are final, and you can now develop apps targeting this new platform and publish them to Android Market. The new API level is 11." Google has posted here an overview of the new user and developer features.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

31 comments

final post released! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35285772)

you can start sucking my cock now :)

Final they say (0)

arunce (1934350) | more than 3 years ago | (#35285778)

Just read somewhere that honeycomb was coming to soon.

Re:Final they say (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35285870)

I, for one, wouldn't want it come too soon. Or me for that matter.

Ours goes to 11? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35285792)

Can somebody elaborate on the leveling system for APIs?

Re:Ours goes to 11? (4, Informative)

Migala77 (1179151) | more than 3 years ago | (#35285988)

Google uses two version numbers in Android: an API level (Honeycomb is 11), and a platform version (Honeycomb is 3.0). Usually the latter is used.
The API level is a simple increasing number, and the platform version is more traditional hierarchical. For example: platform 2.1 was API level 7, platform 2.3 was level 9, platform 2.3.3 level 10, and now 3.0 is 11.

Re:Ours goes to 11? (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#35288738)

I wonder what happens when 2.4 turns up and this leveling system completely breaks down.

Re:Ours goes to 11? (1)

meloneg (101248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35294290)

Since they've already stated that 2.4 is still gingerbread, it will probably only support API 10.

eleven (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35286020)

"These go to eleven" -Nigel

Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35286058)

Do any of the Honeycomb features carry over to smart-phones? And if so, are any of them not included in Gingerbread?

Or, is 3.0 exclusive to the smart-phone feature set?

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (4, Informative)

teh31337one (1590023) | more than 3 years ago | (#35286088)

Ice Cream will merge the two branches. Some of the features like the new notification bar will remain on tablets only, while others will make an appearance on phones too, like the new, streamlined app switching.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35287040)

This all sounds delicious

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 3 years ago | (#35287828)

I still wish Google would assign engineers to bugs/features more readily. Something as simple as extending bluetooth discovery to more than 120 seconds has been requested for over a year now. While I know there are a lot of feature requests for a whole OS sometimes it seems like there's a rush for new and not so much demand for upkeep. Oh well maybe in a few more point releases this will get addressed and be a reason to upgrade phones. There just might be a method to their madness, sell more phones.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35288258)

Why prioritize fixing crippling bugs when you can make new shiny shit instead?

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#35288770)

I know it might be unfashionable to point it out, but it is open source. If you have a fix for a bug, you can just go and fix it. I expect they'll take contributions assuming the patch was clean, secure and signed off on.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 3 years ago | (#35287854)

Hopefully Google Talk VoIP support (with extremely low bandwidth codecs please!) will be along for the ride...

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35286138)

Google seems to be pretty vague on things like that. I'm still wondering when they're going to see fit to release Gingerbread for use on the Nexus One. Given that the Nexus phones are essentially theirs to control, I'm not sure why it's taking so long.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (2)

dlim (928138) | more than 3 years ago | (#35286516)

androiddev just posted on Twitter saying that a Gingerbread update - 2.3.3 is rolling to the Nexus S and Nexus One now. Supposedly, it could take a couple of weeks to hit all the devices.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35286724)

This would imply that there is some merit to the suspicions about Google wanting to fix some things before rolling it out to the Nexus Ones.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 3 years ago | (#35288158)

Well yeah. There were a lot of conspiracy's about the delay, but that was always the only believable one anyway.

Re:Honecomb v/s Gingerbread (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35286328)

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Google-CEO-Eric-Schmidt-MWC-2011-keynote/

Idiot if you developer for Android....apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35286228)

Just remember .apk and apk installer!! Find the easy to find paid app and use apk installer to install it!! Not worth developing on the Android if your looking for money!!

Re: Idiot if you developer for Android....apk (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35286708)

That logic would indicate that it was stupid to develope for Windows, Linux, OSX, as well. I hear there are a few companies that do just fine developing sofware for systems that don't require permission to sell your software. In fact, I have spent the last 15 years making a good living developing software for systems that are not locked down by the vendor.

Re: Idiot if you developer for Android....apk (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#35288768)

Well that's a pretty cretinous statement. The market already provides a perfectly adequate way to control legit copies with the market licensing server [android.com] . Apps can say how long they'll work without calls home and the code enforces it.

Apps outside of market can do whatever they want to protect themselves just like happens in the PC / Mac world.

Finally! (1)

Americium (1343605) | more than 3 years ago | (#35288200)

After finally reaching the mythical level of 11 (and I thought only amps went to 11), it is finally time for a movie and retirement.

IcedAndroid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35288516)

I'll just wait until IcedAndroid is fully up and running and will develop for it under the GPL. Android is too patent-encumbered and Google-controlled, I don't want to waste my time and work for free to support stupid wars between stock corporations. The result of these wars is always less interoperability and less usability. Fully free software according to the GNU criterias is the way to go.

Slow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35289808)

The emulator for this is uselessly slow. Again, Microsoft shows it superiority by releasing a WP7 emulator that runs as fast as the phone allowing you to actually develop something without investing a ton of money until it's mostly done and you are ready to fully test on a real device and are confident you can make your money back with it.

finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#35297776)

That was it, until the accepted backing season, if Actress-Commentator Betty Furness got in on the act. Despondent over accepting to get her anxiety wet to accumulate chic, she took her botheration to Shoe Designer David Evins. His solution, appointed to hit the bazaar some time this summer, is a smartly styled, ankle-high conception fabricated of two Du Pont constructed materials, absolutely waterproof and handsome to boot. NFL Hats [new-era-hat.com] The estimated amount (around $65) sounds high, but abounding women will acquisition it a simple bead in the bucket. Better, by far, than one down the instep.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...