Last daily build with ArmV6 support?
Posted on Sat, 2011-04-16 12:51
Hi all,
I've started working on porting my iPhone game to Android but unfortunately the Android phone I have for dev and testing is based on the Armv6 architecture (its a HTC Aria which is not particularly old in the market). It does, however run Android OS 2.3 but because it's not Armv7, its pretty much a paperweight for me with the latest Corona release.
Also, there are probably vast numbers of end users still with Android devices based on Armv6. Shouldn't Corona be supporting Android OS 2.2 regardless of what underlying CPU is there?? Cutting your end user base to Android 2.2, then cutting it *again* to only Armv7 with 2.2 seems like a fairly large cull for potential customers.
Anyway, can someone tell me which is the latest daily build for Corona that still supports Armv6? I know it will perform slower than the latest release build but I can't use the latest release...
Please don't advise me to simply go and get an Armv7 phone, that is not an acceptable solution.
Cheers
Cel.
Replies
Posted on Sat, 2011-04-16 21:07
#2
Such a big waste!!
Refs: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/Platforms/Android#ARMv6_.28experimental.29
These devices have ARMv6 processors and are not compatible with CORONA for Android:
Android SDK emulator
Asus Garmin nuvifone A50 (T-Mobile Garminfone)
Augen GENTouch 78 Tablet
Coby Kyros Internet Tablet (MID7015)
Geeksphone One, Geeksphone Zero
HTC Aria
HTC ChaCha
HTC Dream (T-Mobile G1, Android Dev Phone 1)
HTC Droid Eris
HTC Espresso (T-Mobile myTouch 3G Slide)
HTC Hero (T-Mobile G2 Touch)
HTC Legend
HTC Magic (T-Mobile myTouch 3G, T-Mobile G1 Touch)
HTC Salsa
HTC Tattoo
HTC Wildfire
Huawei Ascend
Huawei Ideos U8150-B (T-Mobile Comet)
Huawei U8110 (T-Mobile Pulse Mini)
Huawei U8230
LG Ally (Apex) (LG VS740)
LG GW620 (Eve, InTouch Max, LinkMe)
LG Optimus, Optimus M, Optimus T, Optimus S, Optimus V
LG Vortex
MAG iMiTO iM7
MAG iMiTO iM7S
Motorola Backflip
Motorola Citrus
Motorola Cliq (MB200)
Motorola Dext
Motorola Devour
Motorola i1
Motorola Spice XT300
Motorola Quench XT5 XT502
Pandigital Novel
Samsung GT-S5570 Galaxy Mini
Samsung i5500 Galaxy 5 (Corby)
Samsung i5700 Galaxy Portal (Spica)
Samsung i5800 Galaxy 3
Samsung i7500 Galaxy
Samsung Intercept
Samsung M900 Moment
Samsung S5830 Galaxy Ace
Samsung Transform
Sanyo ZIO M6000
Sony Ericsson Xperia X8
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini
Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro
Superpad 10.2" Tablet PC
Viewsonic ViewPad 7 Tablet
Velocity Micro T103 Cruz tablet
Vodafone 845
ZTE Blade
What's happen with CORONA? In the feature, the power of Android is the power of "cheaper" devices from many new manufactures.
Therefore, Calos, anscamobile should help us, we don't need facebook or asynrequest, just fix "low FPS on Touch" error for older version of CORONA - that still support all Android devices.
Posted on Sat, 2011-04-16 21:14
#3
>> Please don't advise me to simply go and get an Armv7 phone,
>> that is not an acceptable solution.
Agree with you.
Abandon Android 2.1, 1.6 then abandon Armv6 is not an acceptable solution.
Posted on Sun, 2011-04-17 03:53
#4
Hey guys,
Seems Build 319 is the latest that will support Arm v6. Check out this useful thread that links to a comprehensive article. http://developer.anscamobile.com/forum/2011/04/16/my-tips-targeting-honeycomb-and-other-stuff
Cheers
Posted on Sun, 2011-04-17 21:40
#5
>>Abandon Android 2.1, 1.6 then abandon Armv6 is not an acceptable solution.
If you can't accept that than I guess you have to look further into different tools. I was here when they have dropped 1.5, 1.6, now 2.1 and Arm6 support. Once the drop is done, Ansca has never looked back in the past and I would bet money on it if they would act different now. They have stated that they are unable to support a stable solution with supporting anything lower than 2.2 and speedup the code below Arm7 so it seems they had no choice.
Posted on Mon, 2011-04-18 02:48
#6
And they will drop 2.2 and 3.0 in the near future? (with some bug cannot fix in *the selected* version of android? )
With 2.2 only and without Armv6 support, we still use corona but, this will be a big minus for CORONA.
Could any one from AnscaMobile tell us what was happening with CORONA and why they drop armv6 support? You simply cannot drop a CPU architecture just because you cannot fix some bugs and solve some problem. I don't talking about an OS version, I am talking about an CPU Architecture and It will not die on the future because the wave of cheap Android device is comming. Really soon!
Could we have a bug free version to build my game for > 65% devices on the market? (I do not need some *hype* features such as openfeint, facebook connect, GUI or asyn-request ) ??
All we need is a version without "performance drop when touching" error.
Posted on Sun, 2011-04-17 23:44
#7
>>If you can't accept that than I guess you have to look further into different tools.
Are you from AnscaMobile?
If you don't know how to fix some bugs without abadon an CPU architecture, how can we trust in you in the future? Did you have some app on the Android market with over just 10.000-50.000 downloads? Did you know how good is in game-ads sale??
We need as much as posible client and download count for our in-game ads business and by this move, AnscaMobile not only abandon some devices, they also abandon their client - like us.
We can accept 65% market share of Android 2.2 version but not for (OS Version >= 2.2 && CPU Archtecture >= armv7)
My last questions: Can Carlor explain (technically) why you guy in Ansca must drop armv6 support?
And in case we need a version (we don't care about some new features, current features list is OK) for all android device without "FPS drop on touch" error, could we have it in the near future? And how long we can build our game with it?
Without armv6 support, we want to say goodbye to CORONA because the power of android is the cheaper smartphone market segment.
Posted on Mon, 2011-04-18 02:24
#8
@khanh.dq: +1
Posted on Mon, 2011-04-18 11:32
#9
We dropped 2.1 and below support because I asked all of you via forum entries, personal outreach, and the majority of you responded positively to dropping 2.1 and below.
It was all about performance and your request so that users don't leave you a one star rating.
We increased Android performance almost 50% across the board and the majority of you who have used the new ARM7 2.2 version has responded positively.
As a company, we have trade offs to make, and if you look at my first post on Android feedback, it is dated January 17th, 2011. See post: http://developer.anscamobile.com/forum/2011/01/18/need-android-feedback. The trade off here was dropping support for older, slower, buggy devices. Not having to do with a touch bug, or this one or the other one. It was fragmentation, performance, and your feedback about the one star rating that I then turned into an open conversation and part of running a company and making decisions is making trade offs. This is a side effect of the trade offs and we as Ansca, and I personally were aware of the trade off since we even broached the subject internally.
One of our competitor is doing the same, with the same issues as we were facing. And part of the trade off is that in order for Corona to be competitive and maintain its competitive edge is to be able to also compete with others in the same space. If all of the sudden, the majority of apps/games in Corona are full of one star rating, Corona will be known as an SDK that creates crappy apps. And I certainly will not allow that to happen. Period. Even if it means dropping X% of the market segment.
And I would like you to show me any other co-founder that can go one-on-one and answer your post on a public forum as well, or who is kneed deep in code and understand issues about its developers more than a mere checkbox in a laundry list of capable devices.
Carlos.
Posted on Tue, 2011-04-19 01:46
#10
Carlos,
Thanks for your post.
A quote:
"The goal for any business is to make money, but that goal is more easily attained when you listen to your customers and know and understand what their needs."
And, our business:
if ( areWeCanUse(CORONA && CPUArchitecture > ARM_V6 && SDKVer >= ANDROIDVERSION2.2ANDUPPER) )
{
//we will have ???? customers on the market ?
}
else
{
//should we?
}
Posted on Wed, 2011-04-20 01:53
#11
Hello, can we build games with "daily build 319" forever?
And can your team fix "low FPSs on touch event" error for that build?
We are happy with it and all we need is it.
Posted on Thu, 2011-08-18 05:17
#12
I have to say (and it's my own fault for not checking properly in advance but...) I've recently brought a Orange San Francisco (ZTE-Blade) as a cheap entry level Android device for personal use / dev machine.
Whilst I've been spreading the corona love far and wide (mainly because of the cross platform nature) suddenly coming up against this pitfall has left me very disappointed...
I realise it's not the biggest and best device on the market, until I manage to save up for an iPad2 it's all I've got - and judging by the number of these devices that are being sold everyday, it's all a LOT of people will have.
Corona Android #Fail!
Just glad I found out about that BEFORE shelling out on a dual platform licence.
8-(
Posted on Thu, 2011-08-18 10:37
#13
we are such failures !
but our release notes http://developer.anscamobile.com/content/coronasdk-release-notes-591 says
Changes to Android OS and architecture support
Starting with build 484, Android device builds you create with Corona will only run on devices that meet the following specifications:
Android 2.2 or later installed
ARM7 (or compatible) processor
our mistake. we should bring this up to the front page.
.c
Posted on Fri, 2011-08-19 00:28
#14
Hi Carlos,
Thanks for the reply - to be honest it's not many CEO's of multi-million pound companies who'd get involved at such a low level (more fool them) so prop's to you for that.
Anyway - FWIW I did get the bit about Android 2.2 in the release notes and was happy with that - after all an requiring an OS upgrade is a fairly easy problem to surmount and given the speed increase on my phone that going from 2.1 to 2.2 made I could easily see why. The thing that bit me in the ass was the processor (not such an easy upgrade to do on a phone 8-)) - having run a variety of apps like Angry Birds (with the floating point Box2D support) and PewPew (the vector based shooter) at a decent level it never occurred to me that a) the ZTE-Blade only has an Arm6 in it and b) that it was required for Corona.
I supposed I'd just assumed that a "lower" spec phone with a lower clock speed would work but just not be as responsive as a more expensive one - just like you'd expect when buying a PC and trading off RAM & Clock speed for price, (I also like the idea of using a lower spec phone as a baseline to try and provide a decent app experience for as many people as possible).
As an aside - I've just checked several different online phone shops in the UK for Android devices and when looking at the phone specs, most would mention the OS version (2.1, 2.2 etc), a couple of adverts for Samsung devices mentioned things like "speedy 1Ghz processor", one site offering pre orders for a Sony Xperia play listed a "1GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon processor" in it's spec but NOT one advert ever listed the processor model ARM6, & or whatever (and in my experience if you asked a salesperson in phone shop which ARM processor the phone had got it, they more than likely look to see which hand they were holding it in and say "left" or "right") - so how's a developer (and ultimately a customer) ever supposed to know which unit to buy - after all, it's all supposed to be Android isn't it?
I suppose at the end of the day - caveat emptor and all that - it's obviously my problem for not reading the release notes closely enough and not doing my research on development hardware, not yours (although apparently my phone WAS supported by Corona when I brought it - just not now in the latest version), it just rankles me that I've now got to get *another* *better* Android device before I can think again seriously about Android development.
Is it likely that the Corona Android base spec might change again in the near future?
(anyone got a spare Nexus-S / Galaxy-SII lying around they don't want)
Posted on Wed, 2011-08-31 11:29
#15
I'm new to Corona and the Android platform. I was pretty excited about the simplicity and cross-platform features of Corona and chose it as the first SDK I would try out.
I did the same thing as techdojo - I also just (a few days ago) picked up a relatively new android phone - the HTC Wildfire S - without realizing I'd be out of luck when it came to developing with Corona or even running newer apps (i.e. any apps compiled for ARM7). I'm surprised, as most games seem to run just fine on the Wildfire.
The distinction between ARM6 and ARM7 is not clear to many people - both users and new developers. Even on HTC's webpage, they do not include the ARM version as part of the specs. I finally came across this website in a forum, where you can find this info for many phones:
It might be helpful to provide a link to this page (or a similar one) in the release notes alongside the afore-mentioned ARM7 and Android 2.2 requirements. If I had seen it I would have been sure to get an ARM7 phone.
I appreciate Carlos' responses, and the decisions made for performance. I'm just wondering how best to proceed with Android development.
One option (I guess) would be to use an older Corona build, as some others have mentioned, to get my feet wet with Corona and then be able to test on my Wildfire. BTW, is it true that apps built for ARM6 will run on ARM7 devices?
Going forward, I'm wondering if all the API and ARM differences will divvy up the market so much that Android development isn't worth focusing on until things settle down and the phones are a little more standardized. It seems like there is more opportunity (less apps) for Android, but also more complications. I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this.
Thanks all...despite the hiccup with my new phone, I'm still looking forward to working with Corona. (there's always my iPod touch)
[addendum]
Thanks dtaib for that very useful link on using build 319. I wonder if build 319 could be made available to non-subscribers for evaluation purposes?
Posted on Thu, 2011-09-15 00:27
#16
It looks like for perfomance reason, Corona must use Armv7 to gain more performance on calculating floating point (FPU). To check if Corona's decision is good, i am looking at some of crossplatform game middleware out there:
+ Unity, force armv7 build (with minimum of android 2.0)
http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/73598-Before-you-buy-Android-for-Unity-ARMv6-and-what-you-should-know.
+ Shiva, no constraint, however performance should be checked on low performance device
+ Marmalade, what interest me is, it could target down to android 1.5 with armv6 and the performance is outstanding, learning curve for marmalade is higher (using C++). People who built Marmalade really knows how to built high performance engine
The most performant from those three is Marmalade, and able to target Armv6. However Marmalade is far more low level than the rest.
Still, major win for Corona is productivity. Maybe for those productivity, Corona's internal architecture needs fast floating point unit. And thus only Armv7 devices allowed. This is a challenge for the engineers, and the shortcut is to just only support Armv7. I hope Corona got brilliant idea to support Armv6
in future ;)
Posted on Thu, 2011-09-15 00:22
#17
I'd just like to point out one thing to people looking at this thread when choosing a compatible device.
ARMv6 is NOT ARM6.
It would be easy to see ARM11 in the processor list and think it's good enough - NOPE!
ARM11 is actually based on the version 6 ARM core and doesn't work with Corona.
Corona requires version 7 ARM core (with FPU)
Basically look for a "Cortex" family processor in your device or don't bother!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture
Just saying...
Posted on Sat, 2011-10-22 07:16
#18
Any Update on this?
I tend to agree, that dropping a CPU architecture is really out of the question...
Like others have said, cheaper android devices will have ARMv6, of that I have no doubt, and customers will never know the difference. or frankly I dont think they will care, if an application or game doesnt work, they arent going to buy a new phone, they will just not buy the application/game, which means lost revenue for us.
This was a nasty surprise for me, buying a new phone is a small price to pay for development, but the implications on market sales (especially since I highly doubt there will be a halt on ARMv6 android devices) could be measured in 10's of %
Posted on Sun, 2011-11-27 02:45
#19
Hey
I am using Motorola Milestone A854 Specs . When I try recent version corona Android build . it is not working on my moto mobile phone .
I hear about ARM6 and ARM7 problem . it looks like I am using ARM6
How to solve this ?
Regards
George
Posted on Sun, 2011-11-27 07:06
#20
There is no solution. Decision are made. Buy a new iphones and get over it.
Posted on Sun, 2011-11-27 09:12
#21
(Personal view below)
I understand you guys might find it fustrating not to be able to develop for arm6 devices but there is good reason for this.
1) Arm6 surely doesn't have long left, it will probably always hold a place in the cheap bargain smartphones but it doesn't have a future in high performance smartphones.
2) Android devices on a whole... A lot depend on firmware these days (along with specs) I recently picked up a archos 101 android tablet, 1ghz single core armv7 processor and it's performance was woeful. Angry birds was jerkier than on a samsung galaxy mini. So the point being, there are a lot of deciding factors on good performance on android devices, firmware being one, processor being the other.
Things are advancing but it's always going to be harder to get your game to support android devices as opposed to ios devices. Thats the beauty of ios, you have x number of generations, the specs (processor, memory) is the same on each device (respective of generation) so there are less variables to contend with.
With android it becomes harder, what could run fine on a iphone 3g, might lag on a samsung galaxy S.
Posted on Sun, 2011-11-27 10:43
#22
Still now , I never found any solution for my demo project
When I compile with build process . I got extension file .
When I try to install on Motorola mile stone ARM 7 Processes .
I got 2 Kind of error
1) When install process . it stopped trigger error for Network info
2) ALLOW to control vibrator
I tested with 2 Night build version (Recent (For ARM 7) and 317 )of corona
Any one help to solve my problem !!!!!!!
Posted on Fri, 2012-03-16 16:08
#23
I have now the same problem, in this moment my company are testing new tool CORONA SDK #fail bye, bye CORONA is not a good choice!! a lose a lot of potential customers....
Posted on Thu, 2012-04-26 19:27
#24
@Martin: This is called feedback - you get over it. It's not our phones that are the problem it's the majority of the userbase out there on ARMv6. All of our Android test phones work yet our customers are reporting problems on their phones.
@Danny: Thanks for posting the personal view good to see staff interacting on the board - ARMv6 devices are still being churned onto the market because they're cheap to produce. The tech still has some legs left before it's discarded.
Isn't it possible for us to choose which architecture we want to target with the build? If we have non-intensive apps with no FPS dependencies and can put up with the touch bug we choose ARMv6. If you have a snazzy game with FPS requirements select ARMv7 for the build.
Right now we're looking at rolling out a network services app for a mobile operator. No snazzy FPS requirements yet we're stuck with a really old build of Corona for Android while iPhone gets all of the bells and whistles. The majority of their subscribers use cheaper newly released ARMv6 Android handsets which continue to sell so we can't turn around and claim that ARMv7 is the minimum standard.
As far as the customer is concerned we wouldn't have Android support if we can only build for ARMv7 yet subscribers can still go out and buy a brand new ARMV6 *Android* handset.
I'm with you Lilarcor Have an LG armv6 phone for dev which I've painfully upgraded to 2.2 (have to hack it) only to find I still can't use it. Resorted to using my wife's phone for testing which is slowing down my on device testing.
I think it's a tough tradeoff decision between focus on stability and performance and also market size. Of course stability should be the top thing IMHO. However the best outcome really is to have stability and perhaps sacrificing performance (as an option) if we need to by opting to use Armv6 for development.
Just my two cents.