LTE ICS Xoom SD support?

[TC_Mits]

I see no dedicated Xoom threads, so --

OK, I have googled around enough to convince myself that it is not going to be quick or easy to figure out if the LTE Xoom with ICS -- stock or rooted -- currently (4.0.3, .4, or .5) fully supports the SD Card or not.

Anyone know the answer?


Perspective instantiates reality.
( By DX w/HoFo app. )

[kbman]

Depends what you mean by "fully supports" because there are some limitations due to the fact that the OS mounts the internal storage as /sdcard and the actual sdcard as /sdcard-ext, causing some issues with apps not finding the media. There are some workarounds and some custom builds/kernels handle the sdcard differently, with another set of compromises.

All of this is primarily due the the removal of USB Mass Storage mode and using MTP mode for all transfers.
This choice has more to do with how the memory is partitioned and the block level write protocol used by MTP, rather than a specific move to limit the use of sdcards. Also the ability to have the card mounted by the phone and PC simultaneously rather than only by the PC in Mass Storage Mode was another consideration.

Short answer is yes and no. The support is there but limited by various engineering choices and OS constraints.

[TC_Mits]

Depends what you mean by "fully supports" because there are some limitations due to the fact that the OS mounts the internal storage as /sdcard and the actual sdcard as /sdcard-ext, causing some issues with apps not finding the media. There are some workarounds and some custom builds/kernels handle the sdcard differently, with another set of compromises.

All of this is primarily due the the removal of USB Mass Storage mode and using MTP mode for all transfers.
This choice has more to do with how the memory is partitioned and the block level write protocol used by MTP, rather than a specific move to limit the use of sdcards. Also the ability to have the card mounted by the phone and PC simultaneously rather than only by the PC in Mass Storage Mode was another consideration.

Short answer is yes and no. The support is there but limited by various engineering choices and OS constraints.

I think I understood some of that...

Do you mean that fixed IM is now '/sdcard' to the Android OS? And the SD read/write device and it's media, the removable SD 'card', has become '/sdcard-ext? (Or is that 'sdcard_ext'?) That does seem odd.

Googling for MTP:
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sam...y-mtp-ptp.html
Seems some see this change as a problem. It looks like it's about the metadata which reinforces the notion that DRM concerns are driving all this.

While perhaps Google has made no "specific move to limit the use of sdcards" the fact that you felt a need to state this would seem to imply that the effect of these changes has been just that. Does Google make available to all Android developers a full, efficient, and easy to use set of programming tools to enable them to expeditiously update all affected apps to accommodate these changes, so that we can reasonably expect the "limitations" you refer to be strictly temporary and promptly removed, at least in the majority of cases?

You refer to "how the memory is partitioned." On a rooted Xoom LTE, are ALL files in ALL memory partitions on both IM & SD read/write accessible with all permissions to the root superuser? Would su have the necessary permissions to (however unwisely) repartition the IM and/or The SD?

Thank you for your always well-informed guidance!


Perspective instantiates reality.
( By DX w/HoFo app. )

[kbman]

I think your concern is misconstrued. Root is a set of permissions for the OS, which allows access to everything in user space ie; /system, /data, /cache.
Root combined with an unlocked bootloader allows access to the kernel and recovery and other partitions, but there are still parts that cannot be modified and are signed, like the radio images and other low level components.

Regarding sdcard support, it is still dependent on app developers to create updated solutions for the compromises introduced by ICS

[TC_Mits]

Thanks, that does fill in some of the picture. Coupla more things --

.

I think your concern is misconstrued.

Very likely so. No surprise there.

.

Root is a set of permissions for the OS, which allows access to everything in user space ie; /system, /data, /cache.
Root combined with an unlocked bootloader allows access to the kernel and recovery and other partitions, but there are still parts that cannot be modified and are signed, like the radio images and other low level components.

The other "parts that cannot be modified" are separate partitions, for the most part?

What OS is controlling access to the "radio images and other low level components"? Is there another level of permissions for that? Or can those modules/procedures only be invoked, stopped, or change parameters through intrinsic kernel-initiated processes?
Or, of course, at compile time?

.

Regarding sdcard support, it is still dependent on app developers to create updated solutions for the compromises introduced by ICS.

Yes, I presumed so. But has Google provided a convenient and properly powerful set of tools for that purpose?

Here is an example where Google has not made proper correction of a known problem easy for developers:

Android issues: issue 8555:
http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=8555
In this case as well, it is easy to construe ulterior motives relating to the SD Card.


Perspective instantiates reality.
[From DX by HoFo app.]

[kbman]

Ok, it gets really complicated to explain all this in any credible manner.

Yes, the radios are separate partitions and are actually discreet chips on the board apart from the OMAP AP processor.
The security is also multi layered and the partitions are signed so you can only load an official set of radio images or the device will not boot at all. There are also proprietary binaries in the OS/AP layer that are not open source and can only come from Motorola. These are the pieces that have to be included in the vendor config if you are compiling AOSP.

Bottom line is, there is a lot going on under the hood that is not open source and you cannot control every part of your device, even if you had the knowledge and skills required to do so.

Your example of the limitations on installing apps to the sdcard is a very old one and no longer a valid concern because there is plenty of internal memory available for application storage on more current devices. They can be moved to the sdcard in many cases if desired, but the sdcard read/write speed is still slower than the internal transfer speed of the memory bus, so it's not recommended.

The tools are there for workarounds, but the limitations are inherent to ICS and, we may assume, future versions of Android.

I am probably the wrong person to answer many of your questions about sdcard based media and the many options available because I am not a big user of those features on the phones.

[TC_Mits]

Winter has passed here in this southern burg and "glorious summer" has arrived.

Very helpful reply as to permissions and partitions.
Thank you, again.

I strongly take issue with this:
.

Your example of the limitations on installing apps to the sdcard is a very old one and no longer a valid concern because there is plenty of internal memory available for application storage on more current devices.

Yes, current handsets have lots of room for apps. I don't see the relevance? Did I mention putting apps on the SD Card? The link I posted was very clearly indicated as an example of Google failing to aid developers to fix a known problem. Yes, coincidentally, it had to do with apps on SD. That coincidence had nothing to do with the question I posed (which remains unanswered): "... has Google provided a convenient and properly powerful set of tools..." to help developers to remove the "limitations" you mentioned on SD Card utilization?

The fact that "there is plenty of internal memory available for application storage on more current devices" is of no concern to me. The fact that, for some users, there can never be enough memory -- whether internal or external -- for media, video especially, storage, on the other hand, is the source of my "discontent".

Your SD Card(s) "in this weak piping time of" streaming media under capped data plans and the ever-present threat of throttling are the only "delight to pass away the time" that always work no matter where you are or what arbitrary data usage limit your carrier has saddled you with. There is no substitute for SD storage either inside the phone or up in the clouds.

Does the advent of internal PC HDDs measured in terabytes obsolete the jump drive?

[kbman]

Take issue all you like...but the sdcard is there and works and you can fill it full of whatever you like, it's just that some apps may not natively support accessing all of the media. As I stated above, I am not a good candidate to help you determine the best ways to maximize your use of the sdcard media.

You are buying way behind the curve, because your prerequisites are very limiting, and the Xoom is basically the only option for fully unlocked tablet with sdcard support and AOSP firmware available.

The upside of that is that independent development is excellent and with added features like OTG USB support you can connect all typed of removable media like pen drives or even external hard drives.

Your focus on whether sdcard support is as robust as it could be is moot. The Xoom, I believe, still provides the greatest range of adaptability to the limitations as they exist on current devices.

You are definitely willfully consigning yourself to a geek ghetto of sorts should you decide to get one because they were never very popular and have been completely eclipsed by many of the current models, but there are still some very good developers working on them and continuing to improve and update their functionality, similar to the Nexus devices and for the same reasons.

It is a culture of DIY and RTFM though...beware!

Edit: I realized I misstated your original prerequisites which were unlocked bootloader, sdcard support and ICS, not necessarily open source firmware. My apologies, but my recommendation is the same.

[TC_Mits]

OK. I'll take your guidance to heart and your determined silence to confirm that Google continues to willfully impede development of the full capabilities of the SD Card.

Now if I can just find a suitable LTE Xoom ...

Perspective instantiates reality.
[From DX by HoFo app.]

[TC_Mits]

Addendum:
The GNote ccum Journal -- presuming vzw doesn't emasculate it -- would also suit my purposes, I think, and would put me at the other end of the curve, as well. Need to look closely at both -- perhaps get both...

Perspective instantiates reality.
[From DX by HoFo app.]

[Susurro]

OK. I'll take your guidance to heart and your determined silence to confirm that Google continues to willfully impede development of the full capabilities of the SD Card.

Is it willfully impede? Or more likely to not put forth effort to develop. Huge difference there.

[TC_Mits]

Is it willfully impede? Or more likely to not put forth effort to develop. Huge difference there.

No substantial diffference there, that I see; just semantic dickering.

Google sustains the development environment. It doesn't want some data usages permitted where SD Cards are concerned. But, it also doesn't want to state that desire publicly. NP, just say the developers should do it. Then it simply doesn't provide the sort of direct support developers should depend on and expect in order to make the SD fully functional.

You see over 500 developer requests over a period of two years to get a known SD Card issue some priority -- and nothing, except maybe the sort of defensibly plausible but speculative denial you posted and that you're perhaps again formulating now...
When I was a programmer, some decades ago, it was all about results -- excuses were moot.

So, OK, 'willfully withhold the effort' if you like that language better. Stonewalling doesn't always mean lying, I suppose, but it's usually a semantic difference.


Perspective instantiates reality.
[From DX by HoFo app.]

[Susurro]

It is not semantic at all.

Google doesn't believe that smartphones need to fully support SD card so they aren't putting resources to develop it. That isn't a conscience decision to block the SD card, that is not developing it.
If they wanted to block the SD card or impede it, than they could very easily. But they don't, they just don't fully develop it.

You mentioned that you were a programmer awhile back, when you did that did you work on the results you were suppose to or did you work on results/features that you thought were needed but not requested? (requested by your boss/person paying your check, not but the community)

[TC_Mits]

TC_Mits:
"Stonewalling doesn't always mean lying, I suppose, but it's usually a semantic difference."

Susurro:
"It is not semantic at all."

So do you think stonewalling is a legitimate and forthright way for business to address some situations? Or, do you allow that it does, after all, "always mean lying"?

.

It is not semantic at all.

Google doesn't believe that smartphones need to fully support SD card so they aren't putting resources to develop it. That isn't a conscience decision to block the SD card, that is not developing it.
If they wanted to block the SD card or impede it, than they could very easily. But they don't, they just don't fully develop it.

You mentioned that you were a programmer awhile back, when you did that did you work on the results you were suppose to or did you work on results/features that you thought were needed but not requested? (requested by your boss/person paying your check, not but the community)

Doublespeak.

I admire your intransigence.
This could easily become a "something's gotta give" situation.

First, I agree it isn't a "conscience decision"; corporations don't have those -- only people, and then not everyone.

This is a long post because your habit of ignoring points made previously that don't conform to your thesis requires me to repeat myself.

Clearly, a significant benefit is perceived by a not insigificant proportion of Android phone buyers in having SD Card external storage on their handsets. You will want to deprecate the importance of that fact. You may even attempt to negate it -- perhaps obliquely.

Just as clearly, Google opposes this. Witness the GNex. Whether that opposition is passive or active , for the moment, seems to be where you are focusing your argument. I suspect the matter is more important to Google than your argument implies.

Consider that it takes a bit of consciously willful gumption to ignore over 500 of the developers you rely on to promote and augment your product -- and this over a span of time stretching from months into years.

You say, "Google doesn't believe that smartphones need to fully support SD card..." That's certainly -- and deceptively -- true. The question would be: If many users want the feature, why does Google not want to provide it?

You attempt to sidestep that question by allowing Google complete discretion as, by analogy, "your boss/person paying your check". The requests, or desires, of the Android phone user "community", then, are "suppose to" defer to the authority of "boss" Google. That turns the idea of the corporation serving the needs of the consumer on its ear. Rather, we now have Google defining for its consumers their needs.

You might find that model awkward -- if you have any concerns for logical consistency -- in other discussions.

The transposition "not but" seems an odd typo.

You will, at that point, then, want the easy answers like cost and slack demand. Those answers poorly fit the facts. For the sake of brevity, I'll omit detail until you invoke those arguments.

In sum, "If (Google) wanted to block the SD card or impede it, than they could very easily." And, indeed, it is doing just that, but slowly and by degrees, so as not to stir things up more than what is necessary to achieve Google's ends.


Perspective instantiates reality.
[From DX by HoFo app.]

[kbman]

He is just telling you how it actually works...not how you might think it "should" work.

I would try to do a better job of not transferring your antipathy towards Google and Motorola to Susurro if I were you...might help you to see the situation in a clearer light.