Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #145558 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-23 17:11 -0700 |
| Last post | 2024-12-31 00:17 +0100 |
| Articles | 13 on this page of 33 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-23 17:11 -0700
Re: One Note Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2024-12-24 04:56 +0000
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-24 08:41 -0700
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-24 08:49 -0700
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-24 09:03 -0700
Re: One Note Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2024-12-24 17:26 +0000
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-25 11:03 -0700
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-25 12:02 -0700
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-30 09:23 -0700
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 23:28 +0000
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-26 10:40 -0700
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 11:44 +0000
Re: One Note Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2024-12-28 09:07 -0700
Re: One Note Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-12-28 16:42 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 01:44 +0000
Re: One Note Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-12-29 03:41 +0100
Re: One Note Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-12-29 10:14 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-29 18:29 +0000
Re: One Note Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-12-29 18:35 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: One Note Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-29 19:15 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: One Note Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-30 11:13 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-31 21:47 +0000
Re: One Note Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-12-31 22:07 +0000
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 16:26 +0000
Re: One Note Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-01 16:52 +0000
Re: One Note Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-12-30 03:36 +0100
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000
Re: One Note Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-12-30 12:00 +0100
Re: One Note Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-01 16:14 +0000
Re: One Note Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-12-31 00:18 +0100
Re: One Note Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-12-31 00:17 +0100
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-29 19:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vksakj.pns.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145795 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > > Chris wrote: > > > >> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >>>> Chris wrote: > >>> > >>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't > >>>> support 13. > >>> > >>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. > >> > >> According to wikipedia it was released this month. > > You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph > > > > "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first > > developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the > > platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release > > expected in the second quarter of 2025." > > The table here states it was released on 18th December: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history Nope, it doesn't. The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia page. 'Release notes' <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vktlcn$1i26p$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #145801 |
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>> Chris wrote: >>> >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>>> support 13. >>>>> >>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>>> >>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >>> >>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." >> >> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history > > Nope, it doesn't. > > The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is > - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. > > If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary > says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in > development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia > page. > > 'Release notes' > <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> Then the table is wrong. I was simply doing a quick internet search to help the OP. > Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android > *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android > versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly. I don't use android, so not up to speed, hence why I thought wikipedia was accurate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 11:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vku2pb.10qc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145838 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >>> Chris wrote: > >>> > >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >>>>>> Chris wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't > >>>>>> support 13. > >>>>> > >>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. > >>>> > >>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. > >>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph > >>> > >>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first > >>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the > >>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release > >>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." > >> > >> The table here states it was released on 18th December: > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history > > > > Nope, it doesn't. > > > > The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is > > - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. > > > > If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary > > says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in > > development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia > > page. > > > > 'Release notes' > > <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> > > Then the table is wrong. I was simply doing a quick internet search to help > the OP. That you can't be bothered to read for comprehension and follow links, doesn't mean the table is wrong. See also Jörg comment about the colour coding in the table. > > Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android > > *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android > > versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly. > > I don't use android, so not up to speed, hence why I thought wikipedia was > accurate. Huh? Then why do you subscribe to this group and say (to Jörg) "It isn't on my phone?". And once more, Wikipedia *is* accurate (on this issue). That you overlooked the note, etc. is of course perfectly allright. Being flippant when people correct you, not so much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 21:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl1opo$2dn4p$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #145843 |
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: >>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>>>>> support 13. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>>>>> >>>>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >>>>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >>>>> >>>>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >>>>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >>>>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >>>>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." >>>> >>>> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history >>> >>> Nope, it doesn't. >>> >>> The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is >>> - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. >>> >>> If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary >>> says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in >>> development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia >>> page. >>> >>> 'Release notes' >>> <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> >> >> Then the table is wrong. I was simply doing a quick internet search to help >> the OP. > > That you can't be bothered to read for comprehension and follow links, > doesn't mean the table is wrong. See also Jörg comment about the colour > coding in the table. > >>> Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android >>> *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android >>> versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly. >> >> I don't use android, so not up to speed, hence why I thought wikipedia was >> accurate. > > Huh? Then why do you subscribe to this group and say (to Jörg) "It > isn't on my phone?". And once more, Wikipedia *is* accurate (on this > issue). > > That you overlooked the note, etc. is of course perfectly allright. > Being flippant when people correct you, not so much. How am I being flippant? I acknowledged the mistake.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 22:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl1tf7.5ag.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145955 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > >>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >>>>> Chris wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Chris wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't > >>>>>>>> support 13. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. > >>>>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph > >>>>> > >>>>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first > >>>>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the > >>>>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release > >>>>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." > >>>> > >>>> The table here states it was released on 18th December: > >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history > >>> > >>> Nope, it doesn't. > >>> > >>> The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is > >>> - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. > >>> > >>> If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary > >>> says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in > >>> development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia > >>> page. > >>> > >>> 'Release notes' > >>> <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> > >> > >> Then the table is wrong. I was simply doing a quick internet search to help > >> the OP. > > > > That you can't be bothered to read for comprehension and follow links, > > doesn't mean the table is wrong. See also Jörg comment about the colour > > coding in the table. > > > >>> Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android > >>> *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android > >>> versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly. > >> > >> I don't use android, so not up to speed, hence why I thought wikipedia was > >> accurate. > > > > Huh? Then why do you subscribe to this group and say (to Jörg) "It > > isn't on my phone?". And once more, Wikipedia *is* accurate (on this > > issue). > > > > That you overlooked the note, etc. is of course perfectly allright. > > Being flippant when people correct you, not so much. > > How am I being flippant? I acknowledged the mistake. Sigh! You said (amongst others) "Then the table is wrong.", so you did *not* acknowledge *your* mistake, but said that it was an error in the Wikipedia page, which it isn't. Bottom line: You were wrong. The Wikipedia page is correct.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-01 16:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl3qc7$2rolg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #145957 |
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: >>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: >>>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>>>>>>> support 13. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >>>>>>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >>>>>>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >>>>>>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >>>>>>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." >>>>>> >>>>>> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history >>>>> >>>>> Nope, it doesn't. >>>>> >>>>> The "December 18, 2024" date is followed by a *note* '[29]', which is >>>>> - as always in Wikipedia - also a link. >>>>> >>>>> If you follow that link, you will get the 'Release notes' which cleary >>>>> says "Developer Preview 2", so exactly as Andy said "16 is still in >>>>> development" and proven by his (above quouted) quote from the Wikipedia >>>>> page. >>>>> >>>>> 'Release notes' >>>>> <https://developer.android.com/about/versions/16/release-notes> >>>> >>>> Then the table is wrong. I was simply doing a quick internet search to help >>>> the OP. >>> >>> That you can't be bothered to read for comprehension and follow links, >>> doesn't mean the table is wrong. See also Jörg comment about the colour >>> coding in the table. >>> >>>>> Of course all of this should have been blatantly obvious, as Android >>>>> *15* was only released little over 3 months earlier. New Android >>>>> versions come (too) quickly, but not *that* quickly. >>>> >>>> I don't use android, so not up to speed, hence why I thought wikipedia was >>>> accurate. >>> >>> Huh? Then why do you subscribe to this group and say (to Jörg) "It >>> isn't on my phone?". And once more, Wikipedia *is* accurate (on this >>> issue). >>> >>> That you overlooked the note, etc. is of course perfectly allright. >>> Being flippant when people correct you, not so much. >> >> How am I being flippant? I acknowledged the mistake. > > Sigh! You said (amongst others) "Then the table is wrong.", so you did > *not* acknowledge *your* mistake, but said that it was an error in the > Wikipedia page, which it isn't. > > Bottom line: You were wrong. The Wikipedia page is correct. I admit I made a mistake. In my defence, as I showed to Joerge, the wikipedia app doesn't render tables very well in dark mode. Given the OP is on android 13 he still could do with upgrading.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-01 16:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl3vc6.mbg.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145996 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: [...] > >> How am I being flippant? I acknowledged the mistake. > > > > Sigh! You said (amongst others) "Then the table is wrong.", so you did > > *not* acknowledge *your* mistake, but said that it was an error in the > > Wikipedia page, which it isn't. > > > > Bottom line: You were wrong. The Wikipedia page is correct. > > I admit I made a mistake. In my defence, as I showed to Joerge, the > wikipedia app doesn't render tables very well in dark mode. Thanks. And thanks for the clarification about what you could not see. And you probably could not easily see all the colomns at the same time. > Given the OP is on android 13 he still could do with upgrading. Assuming that he can. My (over) four year 'old' Samsung Galaxy A51 phone is stuck at 13 (came with 10).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 03:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vkt0v9$1ie07$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #145795 |
On 29.12.24 19:29, Chris wrote: > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >> Chris wrote: >> >>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>> Chris wrote: >>>> >>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>> support 13. >>>> >>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>> >>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >> >> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >> expected in the second quarter of 2025." > > The table here states it was released on 18th December: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history And why do you think Android 15 is labelled "Latest Version" and coloured green exactly in this table? -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 08:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vktlcp$1i26p$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #145819 |
Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: > On 29.12.24 19:29, Chris wrote: >> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>> Chris wrote: >>> >>>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>>> Chris wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>>> support 13. >>>>> >>>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>>> >>>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >>> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >>> >>> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >>> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >>> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >>> expected in the second quarter of 2025." >> >> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history > > And why do you think Android 15 is labelled "Latest Version" and > coloured green exactly in this table? It isn't on my phone?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-30 12:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vktuh3$1j01c$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #145839 |
On 30.12.24 09:24, Chris wrote: > Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: >> On 29.12.24 19:29, Chris wrote: >>> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history >> >> And why do you think Android 15 is labelled "Latest Version" and >> coloured green exactly in this table? > > It isn't on my phone? Nonsense. You are cornering yourself. -- "De gustibus non est disputandum."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-01 16:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl3plh$2rkcb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #145842 |
Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: > On 30.12.24 09:24, Chris wrote: >> Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: >>> On 29.12.24 19:29, Chris wrote: >>>> The table here states it was released on 18th December: >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history >>> >>> And why do you think Android 15 is labelled "Latest Version" and >>> coloured green exactly in this table? >> >> It isn't on my phone? > > Nonsense. You are cornering yourself. Not at all. The wikipedia app on my phone doesn't render the coloured cells in the table. I now notice that when rendered in a browser the colours do show. Kinda ironic that the official app does a worse job than the default browser. Plus in dark mode the version number column is black on dark grey and is not obvious to read. My apologies. This is what I see: https://ibb.co/LCzZH5y
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 00:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ltgo22Fmb01U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145795 |
Chris, 2024-12-29 19:29: > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >> Chris wrote: >> >>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >>>>> Chris wrote: >>>> >>>>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>>>> support 13. >>>> >>>> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. >>> >>> According to wikipedia it was released this month. >> You clearly didn't read even the first paragraph >> >> "Android 16 is the upcoming major release of Android. The first >> developer preview was released on November 19, 2024. Google expects the >> platform to reach beta stage in January 2025 with a final release >> expected in the second quarter of 2025." > > The table here states it was released on 18th December: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history No. The table clearly states, that Android 16 is a DEVELOPER PREVIEW 2 and the version is marked as "Latest preview version". -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-31 00:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ltgnvqFmb01U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #145751 |
Chris, 2024-12-29 02:44: > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >> Chris wrote: >> >>> Android 16 is the current version so it's possible the OneNote doesn't >>> support 13. >> >> 15 is the newest release version, 16 is still in development. > > According to wikipedia it was released this month. No - not right now: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)> Latest release: Android 15 / October 15, 2024; 2 months ago Latest preview: Android 16 Developer Preview 2 / December 18, 2024; 12 days ago A "Developer Preview" is not a release. Also see: <https://developer.android.com/about/versions> -- Arno Welzel https://arnowelzel.de
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web