Android Q(&A): Android Engineers take us on a deep dive of Android Q

Ars interviews Android Engineers Dave Burke, Iliyan Malchev, and Anwar Ghuloum.

Read the whole story

 

[peterford]

So that gives us time to get to parody

I think you need to check your parity...

 

[Deleted member 174040]

From the interview:

what's the right thing for the majority of users? Is simple better?

Almost always. Complexity should exist only when there's no other option.

 

[Buchliebhaber]

As has become tradition for Ars at Google I/O, we recently sat down with some of the people that make Android to learn about the OS directly from the people that make it.

Redundant initial statement is redundant?

 

[peterford]

And now I've read the article - thanks!

Clearly I'm not Google, but if I was, this modularisation and specifically that Generic Kernel Image would be making the ground all nice and fertile for a glorious Fuchsia.

Edit: Please, don't take away notification snoozing, enhance it, Inbox showed it to be a fantastic feature.

 

[NathanMattise]

As has become tradition for Ars at Google I/O, we recently sat down with some of the people that make Android to learn about the OS directly from the people that make it.

Redundant initial statement is redundant?

Snagged this (and peterford's note), thanks all.

 

[sanitychecker]

Sounds like APEX allows lower level system updates from Google rather than waiting for vendor to push OS updates, right?

 

[BullBearMS]

So Google is clawing back control of the DNS resolver code, and were supposed to imagine that they won't use this new control to block the use of ad blocking DNS servers like a PiHole in the same way they already have done with Chromecast devices?

 

[tigas]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

Edit to add:

Clearly I'm not Google, but if I was, this modularisation and specifically that Generic Kernel Image would be making the ground all nice and fertile for a glorious Fuchsia.

Just found out that Fuchsia is now a "real" thing at https://fuchsia.dev/

 

[ap1werks]

We've had to significantly scale up our telemetry.

Is it just me, or is the temperature of this water rising?
-frog

 

[ALittleTeapot]

We've had to significantly scale up our telemetry.

...it's all about telemetry

Yep, this was definitely an interview with Google.

 

[Infinity4011]

The schadenfreude in me would be mildly amused and not at all surprised if someone came up with some clever malware to exploit APEX packages and called it Project Heroin...

 

[reuthermonkey]

Although I understand it, it never ceases to amaze me to what lengths both Google and Manufacturers must go through for "simple" security updates on an 11 year old OS.

While platform updates pushed through Play store are a world better than Android 1.x, the fact that Google is still limited in its ability to push system/security updates in 2019 due to OEM device partitioning is a really annoying example of how little progress they've really made in some respects since the same problems prevented me from ever updating my HTC Dream/G1 from Android 1.6 -> Android 2.0... in 2009...

Still, I really appreciate this article and their candor. It's rare that Google seems to have a "vision" or "roadmap" for just about anything. Android may remain the exception.

 

[AxMi-24]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

 

[megatomic]

It's interesting to hear the thought processes and rationale behind the changes coming to Android in Q. Thanks Ron for the great article.

 

[kruzes]

As has become tradition for Ars at Google I/O, we recently sat down with some of the people that make Android to learn about the OS directly from the people that make it.

Redundant initial statement is redundant?

Snagged this (and peterford's note), thanks all.

Also, "a bunch of future requests" - it's feature requests, right?

 

[grommit!]

This is a great piece Ron, though I notice the typo peterford pointed out is still present.

Malchev: And then, we have a setting where init (part of the Android boot process) would reroute the boot flow to boot from the stashed partition. So you can boot from it, delete it—the idea is you can try new versions of Android, without hurting your device.

I'll be interested to see how this works in practice, and whether it ends up being exploited somehow (yes, all bets are off when an adversary has physical control of a device).

 

[Veiran]

EDIT: NM

 

[co-lee]

I know it's just dreaming, but it would be nice to talk about the article. Rather than the ever present google whining ....

It's pretty remarkable what they're trying to do while dealing with global scale.

Good article, Ron. Thanks.

 

[ewelch]

You look at other operating systems, and maybe they have a bug in their video telephony and they have to push a whole operating system, right? So, that's kind of not as progressive. But if you look at Android, in general, a lot of pieces are already updating. Google apps update very frequently, and Google Play Services updates very frequently. To us, it's a sort of natural progression.

So, if I understand what he is saying is their competition (what else is there besides iOS at any scale close to Android?) then they don't know iOS. Because Apple has long been able to push out updates of a few megabytes. They don't have to push out the whole OS for what they call Delta updates.

So are they talking about their partners such as OnePlus or what?

And with this big shift, are they hoping to get better and faster updates for Android phones regardless of carrier/manufacturer, so that a larger percentage of phones are on the latest OS faster? I want my son's Samsung Galaxy S9 (Verizon) to be kept up to date (secure) for as long as he wants to keep it.

 

[Jedakiah]

You look at other operating systems, and maybe they have a bug in their video telephony and they have to push a whole operating system, right? So, that's kind of not as progressive. But if you look at Android, in general, a lot of pieces are already updating. Google apps update very frequently, and Google Play Services updates very frequently. To us, it's a sort of natural progression.

So, if I understand what he is saying is their competition (what else is there besides iOS at any scale close to Android?) then they don't know iOS. Because Apple has long been able to push out updates of a few megabytes. They don't have to push out the whole OS for what they call Delta updates.

So are they talking about their partners such as OnePlus or what?

And with this big shift, are they hoping to get better and faster updates for Android phones regardless of carrier/manufacturer, so that a larger percentage of phones are on the latest OS faster? I want my son's Samsung Galaxy S9 (Verizon) to be kept up to date (secure) for as long as he wants to keep it.

A Delta update is not the same as modularizing an app, and updating individual components. You can still do Delta updates on the components. Delta's help reduce update size, that's it. But breaking things up into modules makes things much easier to build and test.

 

[Sajuuk]

You look at other operating systems, and maybe they have a bug in their video telephony and they have to push a whole operating system, right? So, that's kind of not as progressive. But if you look at Android, in general, a lot of pieces are already updating. Google apps update very frequently, and Google Play Services updates very frequently. To us, it's a sort of natural progression.

So, if I understand what he is saying is their competition (what else is there besides iOS at any scale close to Android?) then they don't know iOS. Because Apple has long been able to push out updates of a few megabytes. They don't have to push out the whole OS for what they call Delta updates.

So are they talking about their partners such as OnePlus or what?

And with this big shift, are they hoping to get better and faster updates for Android phones regardless of carrier/manufacturer, so that a larger percentage of phones are on the latest OS faster? I want my son's Samsung Galaxy S9 (Verizon) to be kept up to date (secure) for as long as he wants to keep it.

A delta update is still a system update, not an app(/module) update, correct?

 

[Paladin]

You look at other operating systems, and maybe they have a bug in their video telephony and they have to push a whole operating system, right? So, that's kind of not as progressive. But if you look at Android, in general, a lot of pieces are already updating. Google apps update very frequently, and Google Play Services updates very frequently. To us, it's a sort of natural progression.

So, if I understand what he is saying is their competition (what else is there besides iOS at any scale close to Android?) then they don't know iOS. Because Apple has long been able to push out updates of a few megabytes. They don't have to push out the whole OS for what they call Delta updates.

So are they talking about their partners such as OnePlus or what?

And with this big shift, are they hoping to get better and faster updates for Android phones regardless of carrier/manufacturer, so that a larger percentage of phones are on the latest OS faster? I want my son's Samsung Galaxy S9 (Verizon) to be kept up to date (secure) for as long as he wants to keep it.

Not sure what they are talking about there, every other OS I can think of has a pretty granular ability to do updates for something like a communication app (video telephony) without rolling out a new OS build. That seems like they just made a bad example while speaking off the cuff. In fact, I would say that Android is a bit unique in how poorly it was designed when it comes to updates. They allowed device manufacturers way too much leeway to cram in junk that should not be there or to customize things that should be kept standardized, while at the same time, they made things integrated that should have been much more modular like the kernel and drivers and stuff.

I would imagine it was all done out of the interests of expedience and memory footprint and a lack of experience dealing with a sea of hardware vendors that were also stepping into a new world at the same time. Basically it was a new frontier for everyone and the only real competition (Apple) had a completely different approach of keeping the hardware platform completely in their grip so software updates were vastly more simple and reliable.

For your second point, yes, this is about getting better and faster updates for all Android based phones post Android Q. Once a large enough number of phones are running Q from their launch, they will be able to focus on producing updates through the Mainline system which will allow them to update parts of the OS in a more modular framework, which would mean more frequent and smaller updates that take only a reboot and not the usual long update process of recompiling apps and large unpacking/low level install processes, etc. Basically some of the low level parts of the operating system would be turned into apps that can be updated independently of the other parts.

While it would enable longer term and faster support for more phones, it probably won't make it to the S9. There is a chance it will get Q but I kind of doubt it. S10 almost certainly would and whatever comes after. It really depends on how hard it is for the Android Q code to support the older stuff that was done in an Android O and P development world 2-4 years ago. In theory, it is possible but it is up to Samsung to spend the money to do it.


Personally, I wish things had been more like this from the beginning. If Google had been really, really smart, they would have included terms in their licenses to constrain OEMs that want a full Google stack (play, etc from the get go) with support to keep any customization to a limited scope of apps, modules and some plugin skins so that the core functions of the phone can be easily updated. So many OEMs went too low level or did things without working closely with Google and left their phones a nightmare to update when the things they pushed into the system later became supported in the AOSP code.

The cynical part of me says maybe they did that intentionally as a kind of excuse to say, "We can't support new code on those phones so you just have to buy a new phone if you want the latest updates. Sorry!"

 

[BullBearMS]

You look at other operating systems, and maybe they have a bug in their video telephony and they have to push a whole operating system, right? So, that's kind of not as progressive. But if you look at Android, in general, a lot of pieces are already updating. Google apps update very frequently, and Google Play Services updates very frequently. To us, it's a sort of natural progression.

So, if I understand what he is saying is their competition (what else is there besides iOS at any scale close to Android?) then they don't know iOS. Because Apple has long been able to push out updates of a few megabytes. They don't have to push out the whole OS for what they call Delta updates.

So are they talking about their partners such as OnePlus or what?

And with this big shift, are they hoping to get better and faster updates for Android phones regardless of carrier/manufacturer, so that a larger percentage of phones are on the latest OS faster? I want my son's Samsung Galaxy S9 (Verizon) to be kept up to date (secure) for as long as he wants to keep it.

A Delta update is not the same as modularizing an app, and updating individual components. You can still do Delta updates on the components. Delta's help reduce update size, that's it. But breaking things up into modules makes things much easier to build and test.

Google's issue is that they can't manage to push out normal OS patches to their users, so they had to develop a different system that bypasses device manufacturers and carriers.

Apple doesn't have that issue.

What percentage of Google devices are running Pie? There's no way to be sure because the numbers had become so embarrassing that Google refuses to update them anymore.

 

[Jedakiah]

Although I understand it, it never ceases to amaze me to what lengths both Google and Manufacturers must go through for "simple" security updates on an 11 year old OS.

While platform updates pushed through Play store are a world better than Android 1.x, the fact that Google is still limited in its ability to push system/security updates in 2019 due to OEM device partitioning is a really annoying example of how little progress they've really made in some respects since the same problems prevented me from ever updating my HTC Dream/G1 from Android 1.6 -> Android 2.0... in 2009...

Still, I really appreciate this article and their candor. It's rare that Google seems to have a "vision" or "roadmap" for just about anything. Android may remain the exception.

It does beggar belief, but like you I understand it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems like nearly all of their issues stem from their kernel choice. Linux is a great kernel that has had a major hand in shaping our world. But it's philosophy about drivers needing to be open source has hobbled it when dealing with hardware vendors that refuse to capitulate. Including drivers in the kernel is also not worth the tiny performance benefit, a benefit that was barely worth it on 90s hardware. Not to knock Linux, the world has benefitted greatly from it. But, it's not a good choice for Android. They need a maintainable OS that is easy to update, even if it compromises an idealic philosophy on openness and performance over maintainability.

 

[brewejon]

I know it's just dreaming, but it would be nice to talk about the article. Rather than the ever present google whining ....

It's pretty remarkable what they're trying to do while dealing with global scale.

Good article, Ron. Thanks.

It's got to be a weird feeling, designing a system that you know is going to be a part of literally billions of lives. And then there's the problem of deciding which use cases to not support, even though each use case is probably valid to millions due to the sheer volume of usage of your product.

I don't envy them, that's for sure.

 

[AreWeThereYeti]

From the interview:

what's the right thing for the majority of users? Is simple better?

Almost always. Complexity should exist only when there's no other option.

As usual, one can simplify even the concept of simplification too much. Specifically, the pendulum with Google developers has swung far past "simplification" into "dumbification", to the point where I'm starting to move away from Google apps.

Glaring examples? I migrated all my lists into Google Tasks... just in time for them to completely eliminate any kind of full-screen web interface, and turn it into some kind of stupid gmail etc. sidebar, where I can't even read any attached notes that are more than a few words long... and without even a fucking search function. A Google product holding arbitrarily large amounts of information, used by vast numbers of people... with no way to search it.

Oh, and by the way, they also eliminated other "unnecessary" functions like being able to reorder your list of lists so they aren't in some fucking non-alphabetical random hash order or something, or any way of changing your default list (and too bad if you changed the default list under the old interface when you could... now you are stuck with whatever you chose back then, forever).

Simplification is great when you have a relatively well-defined user base. When the target is the whole world population, the least common denominator drops to grandma-level (sorry smart grandmas), and drives away anyone remotely resembling a power user.

edit: missing paren

 

[Chemical Tribe]

This is a great piece Ron, though I notice the typo peterford pointed out is still present.

Malchev: And then, we have a setting where init (part of the Android boot process) would reroute the boot flow to boot from the stashed partition. So you can boot from it, delete it—the idea is you can try new versions of Android, without hurting your device.

I'll be interested to see how this works in practice, and whether it ends up being exploited somehow (yes, all bets are off when an adversary has physical control of a device).

It probably has to be signed and be verified by ARM TZ. Just like any other system update.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

Although I understand it, it never ceases to amaze me to what lengths both Google and Manufacturers must go through for "simple" security updates on an 11 year old OS.

While platform updates pushed through Play store are a world better than Android 1.x, the fact that Google is still limited in its ability to push system/security updates in 2019 due to OEM device partitioning is a really annoying example of how little progress they've really made in some respects since the same problems prevented me from ever updating my HTC Dream/G1 from Android 1.6 -> Android 2.0... in 2009...

Still, I really appreciate this article and their candor. It's rare that Google seems to have a "vision" or "roadmap" for just about anything. Android may remain the exception.

It does beggar belief, but like you I understand it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems like nearly all of their issues stem from their kernel choice. Linux is a great kernel that has had a major hand in shaping our world. But it's philosophy about drivers needing to be open source has hobbled it when dealing with hardware vendors that refuse to capitulate. Including drivers in the kernel is also not worth the tiny performance benefit, a benefit that was barely worth it on 90s hardware. Not to knock Linux, the world has benefitted greatly from it. But, it's not a good choice for Android. They need a maintainable OS that is easy to update, even if it compromises an idealic philosophy on openness and performance over maintainability.

What about when drivers are closed source blobs that rely on qc and company to fix? And that time qc dragged their feet on supplying a highly needed fix to their implementation of trust zone?

FYI, since 2014 drivers are in a separate partition now, and with treble forcing google to not break compatibility with those drivers (the real issue, never has been the kernel) updates are actually not an issue.

That still doesn't mean the stupid carriers don't want certification before issuing them out unfortunately.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

From the interview:

what's the right thing for the majority of users? Is simple better?

Almost always. Complexity should exist only when there's no other option.

As usual, one can simplify even the concept of simplification too much. Specifically, the pendulum with Google developers has swung far past "simplification" into "dumbification", to the point where I'm starting to move away from Google apps.

Glaring examples? I migrated all my lists into Google Tasks... just in time for them to completely eliminate any kind of full-screen web interface, and turn it into some kind of stupid gmail etc. sidebar, where I can't even read any attached notes that are more than a few words long... and without even a fucking search function. A Google product holding arbitrarily large amounts of information, used by vast numbers of people... with no way to search it.

Oh, and by the way, they also eliminated other "unnecessary" functions like being able to reorder your list of lists so they aren't in some fucking non-alphabetical random hash order or something, or any way of changing your default list (and too bad if you changed the default list under the old interface when you could... now you are stuck with whatever you chose back then, forever).

Simplification is great when you have a relatively well-defined user base. When the target is the whole world population, the least common denominator drops to grandma-level (sorry smart grandmas), and drives away anyone remotely resembling a power user.

edit: missing paren

Part of the reason why I've lost interest in Android. All these cool and badly needed changes at the system level are all overshadowed by the bull shit dumbification of Android. Like the ridiculous recents switcher or deciding to copy Apple's inferior method of volume control.

Or of course deciding to wield an ax to the SMS app issue when they need a surgical knife to the problem.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

 

[AxMi-24]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

If they actually listen to the white list but as the site shows that seems to be rare. However, even after ADB murdering manufacturers apps my phone (nokia 5.1 plus) is still killing apps that are white listed and it is hardly alone in that.

If the app is on the white list do not fucking touch it. Do not even think about touching it. If you absolutely have to feel like you are doing anything then politely ask me (once a month or less often) if I'm sure I want that app protected. I would rather have slower active apps than get background ones killed.

 

[tigas]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

If I'm understanding the article correctly, that's not what I'm complaining about

This affects most of the apps which are not just another browser window. Most affected are alarm clocks, health trackers, automation apps or simply anything which needs to do some job for you at a particular moment when you don’t use your phone.

My issue is precisely with browser tabs and apps. Things like going to your linked article in a new tab, copying the above text, coming back to this tab, and the tab reloaded nuking the reply I was composing.

The Nokia N9 had this solved in 2011. Maybe now that everybody "discovered" buttonless UI navigation, they'll discover object persistence some day.

 

[rimbaud]

Nice article, good old school Ars stuff.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

If they actually listen to the white list but as the site shows that seems to be rare. However, even after ADB murdering manufacturers apps my phone (nokia 5.1 plus) is still killing apps that are white listed and it is hardly alone in that.

If the app is on the white list do not fucking touch it. Do not even think about touching it. If you absolutely have to feel like you are doing anything then politely ask me (once a month or less often) if I'm sure I want that app protected. I would rather have slower active apps than get background ones killed.

Nokia is one of those that don't follow the rules as you see. Too bad the solution is go aosp/lineage/derivatives.

I'm on a op3 and i can't tell if it is op or Android being the culprit. It seems better with the pie update. I'd go back to custom rom but none of them feature a built in photo editor gallery app that can add text.

 

[Chemical Tribe]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

If I'm understanding the article correctly, that's not what I'm complaining about

This affects most of the apps which are not just another browser window. Most affected are alarm clocks, health trackers, automation apps or simply anything which needs to do some job for you at a particular moment when you don’t use your phone.

My issue is precisely with browser tabs and apps. Things like going to your linked article in a new tab, copying the above text, coming back to this tab, and the tab reloaded nuking the reply I was composing.

The Nokia N9 had this solved in 2011. Maybe now that everybody "discovered" buttonless UI navigation, they'll discover object persistence some day.

That's overly aggressive memory management. Part of the issue imo. Heck even my n9 nexus tablet isn't that bad. On lineage that is.

 

[Mr. Perfect]

I have to say it's disappointing that they're not pursuing Desktop mode. That sounded like a killer new feature. Pull out your phone, plug it into an available USB-C dock and presto! You've got a desktop with mouse, keyboard, monitor and who knows what other peripherals. Having one device that can do both modes has to be better then trying to sync up two separate devices.

 

[AreWeThereYeti]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

The only thing I wish for people who came up with memory and battery management on android (and at different manufacturers) is slow painful death, preferably in a slow burning fire.

Constantly shutting down applications to "save" me memory and battery is infuriating. If none of the apps and notification that I need work then what the hell do I need the damn phone for? If I turn it off it will function just as well/bad and would have one hell of a battery life time.

PS: This attaches to the above discussion of complexity. They all seem to think that they know best for every situation which makes devices less and less useful as soon as you are outside of the considered user case (which seems to be a single app user where that app is preferably googles or from the phone manufacturer).

As long as they allow me to turn it off, I'm fine with that. But I hope you understand the difference here - Google doesn't kill apps to save memory. Plenty of OEMs however do that too aggressively.

https://dontkillmyapp.com/

If they actually listen to the white list but as the site shows that seems to be rare. However, even after ADB murdering manufacturers apps my phone (nokia 5.1 plus) is still killing apps that are white listed and it is hardly alone in that.

If the app is on the white list do not fucking touch it. Do not even think about touching it. If you absolutely have to feel like you are doing anything then politely ask me (once a month or less often) if I'm sure I want that app protected. I would rather have slower active apps than get background ones killed.

THIS. I've grown progressively more enraged recently trying to get a GPS logging app to persist on my OnePlus 6. Regardless of whitelisting, regardless of what app I've tried, the freaking app gets killed after a little while if that app is in the background (and even if the screen just turns off, in some cases). It has even done this to Google Maps during navigation... I'm navigating along, waiting for my next turn notification... waiting... I check, fucking Maps isn't running.

 

[jock2nerd]

That's all good and all, but how about supporting Virtual Memory for the app runtime and stop closing my browser tabs and applications behind my back?

Edit to add:

Clearly I'm not Google, but if I was, this modularisation and specifically that Generic Kernel Image would be making the ground all nice and fertile for a glorious Fuchsia.

Just found out that Fuchsia is now a "real" thing at https://fuchsia.dev/

What magical place do you suggest this Virtual Memory pages out to?

 

[AxMi-24]

If they actually listen to the white list but as the site shows that seems to be rare. However, even after ADB murdering manufacturers apps my phone (nokia 5.1 plus) is still killing apps that are white listed and it is hardly alone in that.

If the app is on the white list do not fucking touch it. Do not even think about touching it. If you absolutely have to feel like you are doing anything then politely ask me (once a month or less often) if I'm sure I want that app protected. I would rather have slower active apps than get background ones killed.

Nokia is one of those that don't follow the rules as you see. Too bad the solution is go aosp/lineage/derivatives.

I'm on a op3 and i can't tell if it is op or Android being the culprit. It seems better with the pie update. I'd go back to custom rom but none of them feature a built in photo editor gallery app that can add text.

Based on my experience it's both. Android is getting very aggressive in Pie with shutting down everything and anything. I've ADB uninstalled all nokia cruft and things are a lot better but still not good. It started with the upgrade to Pie from Oreo so I'm fairly sure that it's combination.