zlacker

>>colone+(OP)
Android has been bad-faith open source for as long as I can remember. Android is look-but-dont-touch source. Its massive codebase that requires immense resources to build is not open for negotiation, its existence is to serve Google's whims.

Android was already a platform on life support. Google has wielded its authority to dictate how apps should behave such that even 3rd party stores do not stray far from Google's rules. Users of android phones have little hope to run a program from 5 years ago, or to roll back a bad update in an era full of bad updates.

>>bitsan+5i
God I miss the days when I could plug a phone in and get a mass storage device. Imagine, I could copy a video off my phone and copy music onto it at the same time.

>>causal+9I
To be fair to Android, this is a limitation of the MTP protocol and not android. To mount your storage as a mass storage device then the host device (your computer in this case) does raw sector read/writes to the device, the host device provides the filesystem services. For this to work it has to be completely unmounted from the phone as obviously having the block mounted in two filesystems at once would corrupt everything very badly.

Android used to split storage into various partitions, which is why this used to work - It was able to unmount the partition and let your PC manage it. This meant any apps using that partition needed to be stopped, etc etc. It was a pain, and I can totally understand why they moved away from this approach.

Personally I prefer the new way, yes using MTP has some limitations as you've noticed but it does mean the storage can remain mounted on android while your PC accesses it.

>>KiwiJo+dQ
I can't think of any modern operating system that lets a foreign system mount it's already mounted filesystem over USB without going through some kind of server such as MTP, NFS etc.

>>Chocol+Pp1
Again, this isn't accurrate. Please see my other comment on why the filesystem is not mounted by multiple hosts.