Slatedroid info

Everything about android tablet pc [slatedroid]

Biggest Bottlenecks When Building Android From Source

Posted by wicked April - 19 - 2016 - Tuesday Comments Off

Update 4/19 12 pm CT: Clarified build times are ccache build times.

In 2012 I started to build kernels — and relied on my trusty Core 2 Quad Q9550 to build it. If that wasn’t worthy of a cringe then the fact that I did it in a VM inside of Windows will probably ensure that for most folks who build Android from source.

A virtualized Ubuntu environment does not perform as well as a native environment and oh, how painful that was made apparent when a kernel took over 2 hours to build. As I wanted to start building Android from source the following year, I knew my current hardware wouldn’t cut it — and so began a long and still continuing journey to find a way to reduce that ever-growing build time.

In the years since then I’ve been fortunate enough to test on multiple form factors and platforms. This is important since build configurations are not a one-size-fits-all situation with Android. An application developer may not need the same configuration as game developer. And someone building kernels only may not need to spend as much as someone who needs to build a full Android ROM from source in a very short amount of time. And what about OS selection — what can (and can’t) be used right now? I hope to explore this more as well, especially with Windows and Canonical working to bring a full-fledged Bash to Windows 10.

To kick this series off right, we have to find where the biggest potential bottlenecks are in building AOSP projects from source. We don’t often go shopping for a PC or upgrades without knowing where to put your money. So based on 3 years of research and quantifiable results I’m ready to share what I’ve found. Now the expected disclaimer: These findings are based on personal experiences and can’t possibly factor in all combinations. Those of you with your own build configuration, sound off and let us know how your builds are faring! Times are also referring to builds with ccache enabled and populated – was usually double when ccache was not populated yet.

m550-introDisk I/O: I have to give a hat tip to Cyanogen’s Tom Marshall – also a member of Team Kang – for pointing me in this direction last year. I honestly didn’t believe him when he told me this would be the bottleneck over CPU.  But over the past 6 months I’ve been able to back this up with quantifiable data. In higher-end CPUs (such as most desktop Intel Core i7 models) this is the top bottleneck your system will experience.

Let’s take 4 build configurations that I have tested this on. I’ll highlight here the CPU,

  • Build 1, my “un-upgraded” PC, was an Intel i7-4790K with 32GB of DDR3-2400 RAM, a Samsung 840 Evo 250GB for my primary drive and an older Micron P400E 100GB.
  • Build 2, which was the upgraded version of Build 1. Now sports an Intel i7-5960X overclocked to 4.0 GHz, 32GB of DDR4-3200 RAM, a Samsung SM951 512GB AHCI m.2 SSD along with the two previous SSDs. Full build specs for this are on PCPartPicker.
  • Build 3, a recent user build, featured an Intel i7-5820K overclocked to 4.2 GHz, 16GB of DDR4-2400 and 2 Samsung 840 EVO 120GB in RAID1 configuration.
  • Build 4, a recent server build featuring an Intel Xeon E3-1270 v5 at normal speeds, 32 GB DDR4-2133, a Samsung 950 Pro 512GB NVMe m.2 along with 4 SATA Samsung enterprise SSDs in a RAID5 array.

If you just looked at those, which one would you think achieved the lowest build time? How about the second? To my shock it wasn’t the second configuration that took lowest build time – it was the third configuration, at just under 14 minutes for building CyanogenMod 13.0. So certainly the dominating CPU would take second place, right? Wrong again. Build 4, which I just finished testing on, took just over 25 minutes! Only here is where my current build stands, 2 minutes slower than a system with half the cores and threads but an SSD array of 3 SSDs, whereas my SSDs were standalones. The SM951 has also been known to have throttling issues if it gets too hot, something that could be a very real factor in this case. The first and slowest build took about 30 minutes, one of the only times I had built CM 13.0; I have heard of similar build configurations doing it in 27.

SSDs also used to be a difficult item to get so there was very little discussion on the topic. However, prices have dropped dramatically both in retail and secondhand markets over the last year. With 120GB SSDs now under $50 it’s not the barrier it once was to add one to a system. Traditional hard drives will do the job as well, but users are more likely to reach this bottleneck before others if not using SSDs.

CPU SleepCPU: When I mention above that the top bottleneck is disk I/O it does bake in an assumption that may not always be the case – each of those builds I used featured an Intel Core i7. But as I found with the Xeon server, the disk keeps up but then keeps all 8 CPU threads at high utilization through the heaviest of build processes. And try as I might, without the RAID array that we found above I don’t find my Haswell-E even being close to fully utilized for most of the build process. So if you’re looking for the best bang for your building buck, consider the Intel i7-5820K.

True, it’s X99 and so the motherboard may be more expensive than a Z97 motherboard; but we’re also still in year one of the X99 cycle. Prices for Broadwell-E are also expected to remain similar to Haswell-E upon release, meaning that you should be able to buy into the enthusiast segment for almost the same price as a i7-4790K or i7-6700K.

On Intel there isn’t much reason to go beyond a 5820K at the moment as you can get impressive build times with it. For the most part the higher the core/thread count below, along with processor speeds, will get you a faster build time. An i7-4770R in a GIGABYTE Brix last year averaged me a 42 minute build. While not the fastest it did suit my needs and allowed me to have a dedicated low-power configuration. You’ll find the same with AMD APUs – while they may not currently perform as well as their Intel counterpart, they will easily get the job done and usually at a lower price point than buying Intel. This is a situation I have a close eye on because if the rumors are true then Zen based APUs may close that gap significantly.

There is an upshot to those of you who would choose to remove those bottlenecks, one that applies to home users more than the office. General performance will increase on a system by removing these bottlenecks. Gamers in particular will find that upgrading to address these bottlenecks will in almost all cases also increase game performance. While it may not have won the fastest build time, that second build gave an unexpected surprise — a 30 second load time on Just Cause 3 when many others were complaining about load times in minutes. In the end these build times are really high end and may be overkill for many… but at least now the argument that more cores will mean faster builds has been finally put to rest.

Since this is only the beginning we hope readers will chime in and share their build experiences on various configurations. As a reader do you want to see more discussions on these types of topics? Sound off in the comments below!

Google posts April’s security update for Android

Posted by wicked April - 5 - 2016 - Tuesday Comments Off


On Monday afternoon, Google posted the monthly Nexus Security Bulletin that says what the company is doing to protect Android devices worldwide.

Here’s what was fixed this month:

  • Exploitation for many issues on Android is made more difficult by enhancements in newer versions of the Android platform. We encourage all users to update to the latest version of Android where possible.
  • The Android Security team is actively monitoring for abuse with Verify Apps and SafetyNet, which will warn the user about detected potentially harmful applications about to be installed. Device rooting tools are prohibited within Google Play. To protect users who install applications from outside of Google Play, Verify Apps is enabled by default and will warn users about known rooting applications. Verify Apps attempts to identify and block installation of known malicious applications that exploit a privilege escalation vulnerability. If such an application has already been installed, Verify Apps will notify the user and attempt to remove any such applications.
  • As appropriate, Google Hangouts and Messenger applications do not automatically pass media to processes such as mediaserver.

When you check your version of Android after the update, it’ll still read as usual. The difference, however, will be that the Android security patch level will read “April 2, 2016.”


The following Nexus devices are getting the April security update right now:

  • Nexus 5 (MMB29X)
  • Nexus 5X (MHC19Q)
  • Nexus 6 (MMB29X)
  • Nexus 6P (MHC19Q)
  • Nexus 7 2013 WiFi (MOB30D)
  • Nexus 7 2013 LTE (MMB29X)
  • Nexus 9 WiFi (MOB30D)
  • Nexus 9 LTE (MMB29X)
  • Nexus 10 (LMY49J)
  • Nexus Player (MOB30D)

Factory images can be downloaded from Google right here, and you can get instructions for installing them by reading this guide put together by our very own Brad Ward. If you’re patient, Google will have the aforementioned devices fully secured in the coming days and weeks through an over-the-air update. It should also appear for anyone using Android N after manually installing factory images or enrolling in the Android Beta Program.

Two devices not belonging to the Nexus line are already covered by the latest security update — the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Galaxy S7 Edge from T-Mobile, which received a software update even before April’s Nexus Security Bulletin went live, and the BlackBerry Priv.

Source: Android Open Source Project

Come comment on this article: Google posts April’s security update for Android

A Case for Unlockable Bootloaders: How Could Everyone Benefit?

Posted by wicked December - 23 - 2015 - Wednesday Comments Off


The reasons for why root access and unlocked bootloaders are useful and wanted are plentiful. Greater control, customization – if you’re visiting XDA, you’ll have heard them all dozens of times already. We know why we want it, but an argument that is usually left out is why it’s better for OEM’s to provide it.

OEM’s provide a service. Your device is a way to access that service, and whether you agree with the conclusion or not, you can see why they might want to limit your access to modify that service. However, there is a difference between modifying, tweaking and tinkering with your device to match your exact personal preferences and fixing genuine problems.

We miss you, GPE.

When I first received my S6, it had horrendous battery life. During the first weekend, I averaged under two hours of screen-on time. It was a well designed, premium-feel device that I loved in every way, except that it was borderline unusable. In this particular case, I managed to fix it myself by manually installing a different version of Google Play Services, but if I hadn’t, the S6 would have been sent back and exchanged for an LG G4. I would have gone on to tell anyone who asked that the S6 was a great device on paper, but unusable and that they should stay away from it.

Today, I’m happy with it, but better support for Exynos chips and AOSP ROMs would make me continue with Samsung in the future. Now, in my case in particular, root was not necessary, but it would severely cut down the time it took for me to hunt down the source of the battery drain. 

As it was, I first had to figure out why my phone went dead at noon. Plenty of screenshots of my limited battery information and many hours later, I knew it was because “mobile radio active” time was through the roof. Great news! …. except, of course, for the fact that “mobile radio active” doesn’t really narrow it down, as it could be caused by anything that connects to the internet. A few factory resets, and attempts to disable every single pre-installed app one at a time to identify the source did nothing to stop the battery from draining in under 8 hours on standby. Trawling through everything I could find online, I eventually came upon a source claiming it might be a problem with a particular version of Google Play Services (of course…).

So, after manually updating it to a newer version, it finally worked. A proper battery monitor would entirely cut out the process of identifying the problem, and rule out a number of options that instead had to ruled out through arduous trial and error.  

Companies like Sony have won the hearts of XDA users because of their respect for Android’s openness


 Furthermore, running CyanogenMod (amongst other ROMs) on my S4 is the reason I bought another Samsung in the first place. Once CM12 was even close to stable, it fixed as good as everything I disliked about it. So much so, I was more than willing to trade an (at the time) very good camera for early-2000’s webcam quality pictures, and I enjoy being able to just bring up my phone and being able to snap decent quality pictures when I’m out and about.

Custom ROMs are why many of us carefully choose our phones, and power users are at the vanguard of Android

Hell, getting rid of Touchwiz on KitKat was enticing enough that I was willing to haul around a DSLR camera! There is an early version of CM13 available for the S6, but like earlier unofficial Exynos CM ROMs, it is far from fully stable, and it’s not clear if it ever will be. Lackluster ROM performance on the Exynos devices means I’ll be unlikely to buy another Samsung device.

Another aspect rarely mentioned is that the people requesting root methods and unlocked bootloaders are not the same people who would be swayed by the benefits of staying with an OEM-specific Android skin. Instead, they are precisely the type of customers that are more than willing to swap to a competitor that caters to their needs. True, allowing us to root and flash ROMs means we’re more likely to keep the device for longer (and thus buy fewer products in the long run), and one could argue that we’re also more likely to continue with that brand in the future. A recent example is Sony, as the company’s recent development-centric approach has won the hearts of many of us at XDA.

What’s your allegiance?

Brand loyalty is hardly a new concept, and you want to keep your customer happy because of your decisions, not in spite of them. However, such a decision might cause issues with any deals regarding pre-installed software to go awry. Adding roadblocks to root access as a way of maintaining otherwise unsustainable business models is not something we as customers should reward. A prime example is locking hotspot access behind a paywall; a feature that – usually – comes with the phone, yet carriers get away by removing or restricting it by not allowing users to circumvent the roadblocks through root methods.

There are counterarguments, though. First, it is very likely that wanting unlocked bootloaders and having a severe distaste for bloatware coincide. Secondly, devices that are “repaired” by users themselves saves money for everyone. In many countries, OEM’s are required under law to either repair, replace or give back the money in case the device is not working as it should. In the EU, that warranty spans at least two years by law. Additionally, rooting your device will usually mean voiding any warranty claims. True, it might be possible to circumvent it by unrooting, but if you end up in a bootloop (reading this, you’ve most likely experienced the horror of a bootloop at least once), cannot fix it and have to send it in for repairs – they have the right to refuse to repair or replace it. Moreover, demanding payment to access features on a device that is already there has caused US carriers in particular to have an international reputation of – shall we say – “not great” business practices. Allowing root, full control and access to what you have already paid for is marketing and PR kryptonite, especially when your competitors do not. That goes for OEMs and carriers alike.

So which conclusions can be drawn? Giving more control to the users is not guaranteed to translate into financial gain. What we can be certain of, however, is that it would be a show of goodwill. For OEM’s (and carriers who use their own version of the most common devices), it could cut down repair costs and make the product more desirable to us enthusiasts. I don’t think I’m alone in that, being the resident Android-nut in my family and circle of friends, I’m usually asked for opinions before purchase.

Bad business practices are not exactly generating word-of-mouth marketing. But that shouldn’t be seen as a threat – rather, a huge potential for free advertising… And all arguments thus far are given under the assumption that giving customers what they want doesn’t carry enough weight on its own. If there needs to be a financial benefit to do the right thing, so be it. There just might be.

How could OEMs cater to power users without endangering their business model? Is it easier, or harder than it seems? Discuss below!

Sony Publishes UART Plans, Makes Kernel Development More Understandable

Posted by wicked December - 7 - 2015 - Monday Comments Off

maxresdefault (1)

When you get a custom kernel to flash onto your device, in most cases you don’t think about its development process. Developers often use some really complicated tools to make the device boot.

Among them you can find Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitters (UARTs) used mostly for debugging.

One of our favorite OEMs decided to show us how everything looks like.

MG_2392_smallSony is the good guy Greg of Android development. We know this fact and we almost always support their decisions. During our last interview with Alin Jerpelea we learned a bit about Sony’s plans regarding AOSP development. To make things even easier for developers Sony decided to release some sort of manual of using UARTs. Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter uses special ports with different locations in selected Sony devices. With instructions provided in this blog post, things should be easier.

Developing a custom kernel and especially porting the drivers (what Sony did with its universal kernel) is a time-consuming task. Developers without proper tools may not be able to get any logs, as the device is not recognized by shell. Using UART is often the only solution to get a log and a chance to fix things to make a device boot and run properly.

Beware, dragons ahead! If you are not a developer or a power user willing to learn, do note that you might turn your expensive phone into an expensive brick. Use the provided information only when you know what you are doing. Unlocking the bootloader and opening the device cover may lead to warranty breach, so also keep that in mind.

Do you think that other OEMs should follow Sony’s strategy? Or is exposing such complicated plans to the public is a risky thing? Let us know what you think in the comments!

Sony AOSP Recovery Program is Expanding!

Posted by wicked December - 5 - 2015 - Saturday Comments Off


Recovery is a vital part of the Android ecosystem, yet Sony smartphones are distributed without traditional /recovery partition. This is not convenient solution both for users and developers. To include some custom recovery like TWRP, PhilZ or ClockworkMod, ramdisk hacks are required.

Despite this somehow weird strategy, we can’t say a bad word about Sony as they maintain their AOSP project excellently. And today we have some really good news for Sony users: our own Senior Recognized Developer Alin Jerpelea has informed XDA that a new batch of Sony devices are getting official recovery partition support. Now it’s the time to celebrate for Shinano platform users. Five new devices got official support. There are some very popular devices on the list like the Xperia Z2 and Z3, too, and flashing some custom kernels and ROMs can’t get easier now. Here’s a full list of currently supported devices:

Rhine platform

  • Xperia Z1 (Honami)
  • Xperia Z1 Compact (Amami)
  • Xperia Z Ultra (Togari)

Shinano platform

  • Xperia Z2 (Sirius)
  • Xperia Z2 Tablet (Castor)
  • Xperia Z3 (Leo)
  • Xperia Z3 Compact (Aries)
  • Xperia Z3 Tablet Compact (Scorpion)

Yukon platform (requires a modified bootloader to be flashed)

  • Xperia E3 (Flamingo)
  • Xperia M2 (Eagle)
  • Xperia T2 Ultra (Tianchi)
  • Xperia T3 (Seagull)

There is also one platform that still waits for the official support, Kitakami. Below is a list of devices yet to be updated:

Kitakami platform

  • Xperia Z3+ (Ivy)
  • Xperia Z4 Tablet (Karin)
  • Xperia Z4 Tablet Wi-Fi (Karin_windy)
  • Xperia Z5 (Sumire)
  • Xperia Z5 Compact (Suzuran)
  • Xperia Z5 Premium (Satsuki)

We should expect another program expansion in the upcoming months. If you want to enable the recovery partition in your system you need to download the latest FTF file and flash it via Flash tool for Xperia devices. It’s as easy as that. Yukon platform requires a tad more work, as users have to flash a customized bootloader to enable the recovery partition. There is a thorough manual available on Sony Mobile developer pages. Make a backup of your data as it most likely will get wiped.

Are you happy to see such move from Sony? Do you think that other OEMs should follow? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Samsung Galaxy S6 Boots up its First AOSP ROM

Posted by wicked November - 26 - 2015 - Thursday Comments Off


Samsung devices are widely recognized by Android enthusiasts to tout superb hardware but unfortunately acceptable software. Touchwiz – love it or hate it, you’re generally stuck with it if you buy a Samsung Galaxy device.

Thanks to the efforts of the development community on XDA, you can have the option to switch over to an AOSP-based ROM – if you’re willing to wait. Most flagship devices on the market have been blessed to operate on Snapdragon SoCs, making it easier for developers to port AOSP over to their hardware thanks to the extensive documentation provided to developers on the hardware. However, Qualcomm’s blunder with the Snapdragon 810 caused Samsung to drop its use of the SoC in favor of exclusively using its own in-house Exynos SoC.

Enthusiasts looking to use Google’s stock Android software in place of Touchwiz have generally had to wait many months for the developer community to port AOSP to their hardware, thanks to complications arising from a lack of documentation for Samsung’s Exynos brand of SoCs. That hasn’t deterred developers from tackling the issue anyways, and thanks to XDA Senior Member tdcfpp we now have our first AOSP-based ROM booting on the Samsung Galaxy S6.

According to a post by the developer responsible for the initial port, the major hurdle that they have yet to get past is getting multi-boot working because the developer cannot continue testing the port as it would require removing the Android HardwareComposer (enabling GUI rendering via the GPU) in order to check the FrameBuffer. Doing so would currently cause the device to enter into a bootloop, making further testing more difficult for the developer.

Clearly, the team’s work is far from over, but it’s important to show them your support if you’re interested in eventually tasting the Marshmallow-flavored fruits of their labour.

OPPO outs Project Spectrum, almost stock Android with some OPPO software

Posted by wicked November - 19 - 2015 - Thursday Comments Off


One of the things people disagree with in OPPO phones is admittedly ColorOS, the China-based company’s proprietary skin for Android. The devices themselves are pretty good and the specs are nice, but the market seems to prefer a more Nexus-like stock Android experience. This is the rationale for Project Spectrum, OPPO’s version of (almost) stock AOSP, with a few apps and features taken from ColorOS to highlight their usage.


Project Spectrum (from “colors” is ColorOS, geddit?) was announced by OPPO a few weeks before, and this is a reaction of the company to people who, err… do not appreciate ColorOS. It’s basically Android 5.1.1 Lollipop AOSP with three holdover features from ColorOS – these include screen-off gestures, the ColorOS camera app, and MaxxAudio. No other bloatware included.

First up for you OPPO users is Project Spectrum for the Find 7 device. It’s now available for download via the OPPO community forums. Just make sure you backup data from your phone when you update to this, because it will wipe out your storage.

And if you are using this, try to give OPPO some feedback about what you like with this version. This may or may not cause them to make Project Spectrum as a legit option for their phones, but it helps all of those who want a near-stock experience on their devices.

VIA: AusDroid

Sony makes experimental AOSP camera app available to developers

Posted by wicked November - 19 - 2015 - Thursday Comments Off


Sony has just released an experimental AOSP camera app for use with devices in Sony’s Open Device program. The camera app is aimed purely at developers, with Sony hoping that the app will allow them to create custom ROM’s with basic camera functions.

Experimental AOSP camera available for experienced developers – Developer WorldThe experimental camera app is based on Qualcomm’s framework, but has not been calibrated, lacks Sony’s tweaks and enhancements, and is prone to lagging and crashes. Despite not being intended for daily use, Sony hopes the app will allow developers to dig into the app’s innards, inspiring innovation along the way. The following Xperia devices are compatible with the camera app:

The Xperia Z5, Z5 Compact, and Z5 Premium (MSM8994), Xperia M2, Xperia E3, and Xperia T3 will be added to the list at a later date. If you’d like to get your hands dirty, just click the source link below to get started with the experimental camera app.


Source: Sony

Come comment on this article: Sony makes experimental AOSP camera app available to developers

Sony opens up experimental AOSP camera to developers

Posted by wicked November - 19 - 2015 - Thursday Comments Off


Sony has become increasingly open regarding software development and third parties, as well as taking on extra feedback from the community, with its Open Device program and the company has just released a new open source camera application for use with AOSP Xperia devices.

Before you all run to try it out, Sony clearly states that it does not recommend the app for daily use, as the app is not calibrated and will produce worse looking shots that Sony’s regular camera app. Instead, Sony stresses that the goal of the project is to allow developers to get behind the scenes to come up with innovative new camera applications and will hopefully improve support custom ROMs with basic camera functionality. It’s going to be interesting to see what comes out of it.

The open source camera is based on Qualcomm framework and works with a number of Xperia devices, including the Xperia Z1 Compact, Xperia Z1, Xperia Z Ultra (MSM8974), Xperia Z2 and Xperia Z2 Tablet (MSM8974AB), Xperia Z3 Compact, Xperia Z3, Zperia Z3 Tablet Compact (MSM8974AC) and Xperia Z3+, and Xperia Z4 Tablet (MSM8994). Support for the Xperia Z5 range, Xperia M2, E3 and T3 will be added in at a later date.

Sony’s Open Device program saw early Marshmallow binaries arrive for a number of its Xperia devices back in October, giving custom ROM development a good head start over handsets from other manufacturers. If you would like to learn more about the program, you can read all about it over on Sony’s official site.

OPPO’s AOSP ROM: Interview About a Delightful OPPOrtunity

Posted by wicked November - 12 - 2015 - Thursday Comments Off


At the Big Android Barbecue 2015, we had the pleasure of checking out OPPO’s latest efforts in ROM making — an AOSP ROM that sits in stark contrast with their traditional software offerings.

With said AOSP ROM, OPPO aims to provide the software that power users, enthusiasts and developers around the world would love on OPPO devices. Moreover, said ROM comes at a time when OPPO is expanding internationally on a new level and scale for the company. Their new AOSP ROM effort is meant to be easy to flash, and will not void the warranty of devices sold in Europe through or Amazon — quite a deal in today’s smartphone landscape! While support is limited to a few of their key devices at first, the company is not ruling out the possibility of expanding the project to many more devices.

We sat down Marie Tatibouet from OPPO’s New Markets Division to learn some more about this project, what it aims to provide and why it is such an important step forward for the company.


Who is the target audience of your AOSP ROM project, and why has OPPO decided to target such a group?

The target audiences of AOSP ROM is mainly pro users, they are keen to update to the latest Android version which we couldn’t achieve with ColorOS in a short time, the AOSP version provides an alternative choice for them.  

What differences does such demographic have with the main consumer base? Have you always thought of targeting the enthusiast/developer group?

They are mostly opinion leaders, active on the internet and have bigger influence among their friends. We have been trying to target the enthusiast/developer group since we begin the ColorOS Beta program, now the AOSP program is making this step further.

OPPO devices have some good development going on our forums and other communities. How will official AOSP ROMs enhance such developments? Are there any other ways in which you can or will help developer communities make your hardware shine?

We are really thankful for these developers developing custom ROMs for us, some of them have been very helpful to help us fix problems on the previous ColorOS Beta. Our official AOSP ROMs will combine some ColorOS features; we are still new and a lot needs to be learned from other ROM developers, we are hoping they would help us to make this ROM grow and prosperous.

Why is the project starting with a Lollipop ROM, and not a Marshmallow one? What kind of issues are involved?

For phone manufacturers, we need to use Qualcomm base instead of the AOSP base to promise the stability of the firmware. Qualcomm base for Android M is not ready yet, but when they are ready, we will switch to it as soon as possible. As phone manufacturers, we have differences with 3rd party developer software; we need to pass Google CTS and GTS tests which from our past experience using AOSP base is almost impossible thus we have to wait for the Qualcomm base.

Which features from OPPO’s stock ROM will make it into the AOSP ROM? Will these be expanded upon if demand calls for it?

Currently planned features such as ColorOS Camera, some screen-off gestures, MaxxAudio (Find 7) etc. we may consider to expand it in the future in accordance with user feedback.

Once the project takes off, can we expect ongoing support and quick updates?

The AOSP ROM will stay simple and clean, quick bug fixes will be released if needed, however we don’t have plans to release weekly updates like the previous ColorOS Beta.

We know the team assigned to this project is currently small, are there any plans on expanding it opening it up?

Depending on the feedback from the users, if AOSP ROM proves to be popular enough we may consider expanding

OPPO is growing rapidly and expanding to new frontiers. Apart from the demographic dichotomy of enthusiast/casual consumer, how can these AOSP ROMs benefit your new targets? Could they ever be implemented as a out-of-the-box alternative?

AOSP ROM is a new step forward for us to better serve the international users, our goal is to make this ROM as good as an out-of-the-box alternative, and until it meets our standard we will still use ColorOS as the out-of-the-box firmware.

Considering the community has been asking for this for a long time, how has the initial response been? What are OPPO ‘s own expectations for the AOSP ROM?

The reponse from our community has been very positive so far, we expect the AOSP ROM be stable and clean which could meet the demaind from our loyal customers.

Is there anything you’d like to say to the developer community over at XDA?

OPPO has been in a very good relationship with the developer community since out first international device Find 5 went on the international market, we attended the first 2 DevCon organized by XDA where we got closer to the community. We are sincerely thankful for all developers helping developing custom ROMs for OPPO devices, from Find 5 to Find 7 it’s been a great adventure all the way, we would hope this great relationship will continue in the future!

What do you think about OPPO’s AOSP ROM project? Do you wish more manufacturers followed these practices? Let us know below!

ePad 7 Android 4.0 ICS
$162 $100 FREE SHIPPING 

10" Android 4.2 1.2GHz Tablet PC