However a Gingerbread leak for the i9000 Galaxy S phones has shown up, so hopefully they're working faster on that than they did getting you guys FroYo.

Oh, and I've had Gingerbread (2.3.2 currently) on my first gen Droid for about a month now thanks to the folks at CyanogenMod. So even if this were a piece about the OS alone it's still horribly old news.

The phone has been out for almost three months now.

Way to be current.

Late reply, but just to clarify as I might not have been clear with my wording.

The A and B were not releases, but code-names used internally.

The C-Cupcake release was the first Google release which had the treat themed codename.

So the 1.0 and 1.1 releases were outliers in this trend of codenames.

The response from Rubin about the rumored requirements for Gingerbread was, "Don't believe everything you hear."

A and B pre-date Google's purchase of Android, Inc.

A was Android
B was Bender (Futurama)

Cupcake was the first release under Google which started the naming after treats instead of robots.

Uh, no. Just no.

Eric Schmidt has said that since Android is open carriers/manufacturers aren't going to be prevented when it comes to customizing the builds they use.

However a rumored goal for Gingerbread was to give it some of the shared UI tweaks that things like HTC Sense and MotoBlur have added to /reduce/ the customizations carriers will do by making them irrelevant. But that's far and away a whole other thing than expressly forbidding it.

As for updates coming simultaneous? Don't hold your breath. Besides the fact that carriers and manufacturers will still put their own builds together there really is more to it than just customizations.

Take the original Moto Droid for instance. It's a Google Experience phone, has no Moto Blur or other "enhancements" of which you refer and still it took months for FroYo to be deployed to it compared to the Nexus.

So you left Verizon before they had any Android phones for the behavior that they don't practice when it comes to said Android phones?

It's okay, I left Ford because of the exploding gas tanks they put in their pintos. Customer satisfaction must count for something.

No they're not, and this is what the bulk of people don't get with this lawsuit.

Google is not using a JVM. Not J2ME, not J2SE, and certainly not J2EE.

The java programming language is strictly syntax that results in code. In the case of the Android development process the output is incapable of running on any JVM. It simply isn't Java Bytecode .

The only terms that Oracle can put forth are terms for use of the JVM. Since Dalvik isn't a JVM, and isn't provided by Oracle, Google is in violation of no terms of an agreement with Oracle.

That said, the lawsuit (as others have stated in thread) is Oracle is claiming that the Dalvik VM implements technologies covered by patents held by Oracle. That's it. This is simply a patent case, not a suit over violation of terms.

Engadget and others posted pictures of Verizon branded 4G LTE SIM cards.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/19/verizons-4g-lte-sim-in-the-wild/

Can write and install apps on your iPhone without having to pay Apple any money for that right?

Android's SDK is free, and you only have to pay a one time $25 fee if you want to publish the app in the market. However, unlike the iPhone/iPad you don't HAVE to publish in the market as you can link to the install files and people can install them if they chose.

As far as I know not only do you need an Apple computer to be able to write iPhone/iPad apps, but you have to pay $100 /per year/ for the right to do so.

Looks like others got to this before I did, and they all answered it well. =P

The reason it's done this way is so that the APK installation process can present and verify the rights before the app even runs. As opposed to letting an app run merrily until it tries to do something it needs permission for for the first time.

In the FroYo Market app it's also used with the user-settable permission to auto-update per App. Apps will update automatically so long as their required permissions don't change. If they do, it gets flagged as needing a Manual update.

You list the permissions your app needs in the AndroidManifest.xml file. They're not computed by what the app does in code.

So you had a permission there which you did not need.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's like that (though maybe not that much storage.)

Here's the radio specs from the ADP2:

* GSM/GPRS/EDGE Quad band
* 850/900/1800/1900 MHz
* WCDMA 1700/2100 MHz : BC4
* 2100 MHz : BC1
* HSPA Speed HSDPA 7.2 Mbps
* HSUPA 2 Mbps

So that covers both AT&T and T-Mobile's frequencies if I''m reading that right. I can't imagine they wouldn't do the same for ADP3, especially if it's HTC who's making it as they made the ADP2.

Or if the rumors turn out to be true wait for it to be offered as the 3rd Developer Phone. Pay the $20 to be an Android developer and buy it outright.

I hope they do so... the Hero version they have currently with 1.6 on it is getting long in the tooth. Especially once Gingerbread comes out and needs 1GHz, 3.5" screen, etc...