This is a general question from me trying to understand things better. Before the D4 I had a samsung stratosphere. Completely unlocked bootloader with full capability to flash custom ROM/kernel images. Despite this no AOSP ROMs could be build due to lack of driver sources. It was the same situation with the Epic 4G. The Droid 4 on the other hand had the bootloader locked with the key thrown away. Despite this CM9 and other AOSP ROMs are up and nearly fully operational, even with ICS booting on GB kernels. What makes this possible on D4 but not the stratosphere?
My guess is that driver software is available for the D4. This is due to the fact that Motorola uses parts from other OEMs (TI CPU ect) with public drivers. Samsung on the other hand uses their own proprietary parts and keeps the drivers private. Is this an accurate assessment?
It would seem then that the most important thing to making development possible for a phone (apart from popularity) is driver availability, NOT whether or not the bootloader is unlocked. Is that true? Regardless, I will probably steer clear of samsung for future android purchases. HTC still seems best and motorola acceptable. If only HTC still made high end QWERTYs.
Usually devs just pull the proprietary files off the phone and use it in the compile/builds. This has been going on for Motorola phones since the original Droid.
Sounds like no one invested in seeing what proprietary files were needed from the Stratosphere or Epic 4G.
Public AOSP code mixed with copying in private/proprietary files is how most ROMs are made. The higher the user base of a device, the higher the development activity and the larger number of devs finding out what all is needed to be pulled from the stock device to compile a fully functional ROM.
Since some proprietary files are used....you need them for the same version OS you are building, ie...use stock phones ICS drivers for ICS builds or stock phones GB drivers for Gingerbread builds. You can sometimes hack drivers to work but with lots of limitations. Also drivers depend on the kernel so a matching kernel is needed......requiring the device to have the needed kernel level or an unlocked bootloader to be able to replace the stock kernel.
We wont be seeing an unlocked bootloader? Ever?
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
twizzles said:
We wont be seeing an unlocked bootloader? Ever?
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All signs point to no...we will never see an unlocked bootloader on the current Motorola devices.
With Google owning Motorola Mobility and already replacing MM CEO with one of their own from Google........it's possible future devices may be unlock capable.
Current devices....no, not ever.
The first locked bootloader on a Motorola droid was the Droid 2. It still has not been unlocked, hacked, cracked, etc... How long has it been out?
Motorola released a special Razr Dev model with an unlockable bootloader...retail price, zero warranty, nothing you do on it would transfer over to the normal Razr or Razr Maxx.......so why would anyone buy it? Great PR for them to say "see..we released an unlockable device and no one bought it".
Well that just sucks. Thank you for the info
Sent from my DROID4 using xda premium
I have to say, I don't mind not having an unlocked bootloader. I had the Galaxy Nexus and ran multiple different setups on it. The radio still sucked though. With the Droid 4, I don't feel the need to do a lot of hacking. The phone is well built, radio is awesome, it just works.
GermanGuy said:
I have to say, I don't mind not having an unlocked bootloader. I had the Galaxy Nexus and ran multiple different setups on it. The radio still sucked though. With the Droid 4, I don't feel the need to do a lot of hacking. The phone is well built, radio is awesome, it just works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kind of agree with you for the most, but still I prefer the option and think we should have it as an option. It's one way to keep a device relevant throughout your 2 year contract. For example....the Droid 3. I have one, bought online day of release. In less than a years time it has become a non-supported, forgotten device from Motorola. The locked bootloader prevents devs from picking apart the Droid 4 leaked ICS kernel and compiling one with Droid 3 specs (less RAM, etc..) and bringing a fully functional ICS build to the Droid 3. Unlocked...that would be possible.
JKingDev said:
This is a general question from me trying to understand things better. Before the D4 I had a samsung stratosphere. Completely unlocked bootloader with full capability to flash custom ROM/kernel images. Despite this no AOSP ROMs could be build due to lack of driver sources. It was the same situation with the Epic 4G. The Droid 4 on the other hand had the bootloader locked with the key thrown away. Despite this CM9 and other AOSP ROMs are up and nearly fully operational, even with ICS booting on GB kernels. What makes this possible on D4 but not the stratosphere?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I, as well, went from the Stratosphere to the Droid 4. I love my Stratosphere and still have it, but the lack of development on it is just down right aggravating. That is why I took it upon myself to learn how to compile a kernel to provide everyone with root and recovery for it. Otherwise we wouldn't have the ROMs we have for it now. If it wasn't for the Droid Charge using the exact same dev board as the Strat, I doubt we'd even have that much. I had to take the Charge build of CWM and packed it in a Strat kernel and tweaked the scripts, thank god at least that worked.
JKingDev said:
My guess is that driver software is available for the D4. This is due to the fact that Motorola uses parts from other OEMs (TI CPU ect) with public drivers. Samsung on the other hand uses their own proprietary parts and keeps the drivers private. Is this an accurate assessment?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure about the Motorola drivers, but you are right about Samsung. The first time I compiled the kernel, I was missing 11 modules. I couldn't figure out what I did to keep them from being compiled... and then I learned the sneakiness Samsung uses to get around releasing the source, they compile the kernels for the file system and radios and dynamically link them in the init.rc script. Apparently a lot of them do this, actually.
JKingDev said:
It would seem then that the most important thing to making development possible for a phone (apart from popularity) is driver availability, NOT whether or not the bootloader is unlocked. Is that true?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually both are true to some extent, with a locked bootloader you are stuck with OEM signed boot images and can't recompile the kernel to your own needs, or compiling one with ro.secure = 0 so you get root access in adb (which is how I rooted the Stratosphere). Then you need the drivers to talk to the hardware too. Without them, you'd need to reverse engineer them or use the currently complied ones (also, like we did with the Strat). Finally, you have to have the source for the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) in Android so Android as an OS knows how to talk to the drivers to make calls, send messages, use data, etc. THIS is where we are currently hung up from using AOSP on the Stratosphere. I know work is being done on the RIL for the Charge and since its the same board, we might get lucky and be able to reuse most (if not all) of the same code and bring new life to it. But, I wasn't getting my hopes up and decided to get a D4 anyway.
JKingDev said:
Regardless, I will probably steer clear of samsung for future android purchases. HTC still seems best and motorola acceptable. If only HTC still made high end QWERTYs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You and me both. I was in love with the keyboard on my HTC Touch Pro 2 and wish they'd release something like that running Android on Verizon with newer hardware. Closest they had to a QWERTY on VZ was the Merge, and they botched that up from the gate. I also have the Rezound and am trying to design a way to attach a sliding keyboard to the back battery cover to give me something closer to what i have been wanting in a phone.
I think us QWERTY loves on VZ are at the mercy of Motorola and Motorola alone with the original Droid line of sliders.
KnightCrusader said:
I, as well, went from the Stratosphere to the Droid 4. I love my Stratosphere and still have it, but the lack of development on it is just down right aggravating. That is why I took it upon myself to learn how to compile a kernel to provide everyone with root and recovery for it. Otherwise we wouldn't have the ROMs we have for it now. If it wasn't for the Droid Charge using the exact same dev board as the Strat, I doubt we'd even have that much. I had to take the Charge build of CWM and packed it in a Strat kernel and tweaked the scripts, thank god at least that worked.
I am not sure about the Motorola drivers, but you are right about Samsung. The first time I compiled the kernel, I was missing 11 modules. I couldn't figure out what I did to keep them from being compiled... and then I learned the sneakiness Samsung uses to get around releasing the source, they compile the kernels for the file system and radios and dynamically link them in the init.rc script. Apparently a lot of them do this, actually.
Actually both are true to some extent, with a locked bootloader you are stuck with OEM signed boot images and can't recompile the kernel to your own needs, or compiling one with ro.secure = 0 so you get root access in adb (which is how I rooted the Stratosphere). Then you need the drivers to talk to the hardware too. Without them, you'd need to reverse engineer them or use the currently complied ones (also, like we did with the Strat). Finally, you have to have the source for the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) in Android so Android as an OS knows how to talk to the drivers to make calls, send messages, use data, etc. THIS is where we are currently hung up from using AOSP on the Stratosphere. I know work is being done on the RIL for the Charge and since its the same board, we might get lucky and be able to reuse most (if not all) of the same code and bring new life to it. But, I wasn't getting my hopes up and decided to get a D4 anyway.
You and me both. I was in love with the keyboard on my HTC Touch Pro 2 and wish they'd release something like that running Android on Verizon with newer hardware. Closest they had to a QWERTY on VZ was the Merge, and they botched that up from the gate. I also have the Rezound and am trying to design a way to attach a sliding keyboard to the back battery cover to give me something closer to what i have been wanting in a phone.
I think us QWERTY loves on VZ are at the mercy of Motorola and Motorola alone with the original Droid line of sliders.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the replies. It is interesting stuff. And KC I definitely appreciated your work on the Strat. So I guess it really was a question of popularity being the problem for stratosphere. I definitely know it wasnt the most popular device but it also seemed like reverse engineering drivers for the Samsung devices was so much harder. The charge was relatively popular and years later the RIL has still not been successfully reverse engineered. All the moto devices get cracked so quickly. Is it only because they are more popular, or are there other reasons that make them easier to hack? Thats what leads me to think maybe it's samsung's use of proprietary hardware that makes things more difficult. Does that have something to do with it?
Related
Without an unlocked boot loader, which would allow for a custom kernel, we will never see substantial development on the Atrix.
Lack of (the ability to run) custom kernels prevents many of the modifications that have made Cyanogenmod and other popular ROMs appealing. (including overclocking, enhanced power management and screen color adjustments just to name a few)
The best we could hope for (without an unlocked bootloader) would be a stock version of android, devoid of all things Blur.
Luckily the latter will happen sooner rather than later, imo.
Like some other posters said, we still have hope. There are three main sources of unlocking the bootloader, I will list them here in the order I feel they are likely to actually happen chronologically:
1. Information gleaned from the LG Optimus 2X will directly translate into an unlocked bootloader on the Atrix:
If unconfirmed rumors are to be believed, the LG Optimus 2X, which runs the same Tegra 2 SOC (system on chip) as the Atrix, has already had its bootloader unlocked. With a European March release eminent (its only available in South Korea currently) it could only be a small matter of time before the same methods used to unlock the 2X fall into our hands.
2. Out of the box thinking by Developers leads to exploiting the bootloader:
Inquisitive and risky developers here at XDA have been laying waste to bootloaders and the like for years now. The Tegra 2 System On a Chip Platform is still very much in its infancy, it stands to reason that there are quite a few vulnerabilities hiding just under the surface awaiting the prodding minds of credit hungry devs.
3. Motorola makes good on their "promise" and gives us the keys to the castle:
Motorola has alluded to the possibility of releasing their secure grasp on our most prised dual core phone. Rest assured it won't literally be "keys" they give us, and more likely they will provide a flashable development bootloader accessible as a download to registered developers.
What method do you think will happen, first?
I think we may learn something from the Optimus 2X.
im feeling pessimistic about this. im not thinking its going to get cracked. hope im wrong though
The Devs always win, why would Moto release the software? Because they feel like it? Sorry they are worried about one thing and that is the bottom line, they wont do anything to help a small portion of their customer base.
You need to have an option for "DG will figure it out"
if anything we'd learn we should learn that from the XOOM, no ?
LG use the tegra 2 and all, but different company do ( lock ) things differently
oFUNGUSo said:
im feeling pessimistic about this. im not thinking its going to get cracked. hope im wrong though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately I'm in line with you. It doesn't seem like there's any motivation for Motorola to release the keys, and from past history with their devices cracking the bootloader does not look promising.
It's a shame because this is a very good phone that just needs a little tweaking (removing Blur).
There has to be some way without the keys.. I don't know what, but it can't require just those. We need to get other developers to look at the Atrix. Like I said in the other thread, jimmydafish and maybe even koush could help DG try to find some way to bring ROMs. Even if they don't fully unlock it, just do it similar to the droid x.
Atrix4G Rooted!
the poll results speak truth.
*sad face*
its dumb too because i returned my craptivate to get this phone, and now i wont be able to do all the same cool stuff to it.
i guess i have 20 more days where i could return this and either go to the crappy again, or inspire. im juggling the idea, but the dual core, large ram and good battery life are making me lean towards just keeping this phone.....oh and the fact taht the GPS works when the crappy didnt
oFUNGUSo said:
the poll results speak truth.
*sad face*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sir are no economist!
But seriously... if you look at the results, an overwhelming majority believe that we will in one way or another obtain an unlocked bootloader:
66.18% of all voters think it will happen, while only 33.82 think it never will.
Have faith in the DEVs, I'm voting on option 2!
it won't be cracked, it's almost impossible, but the droid x wasn't doomed because it still has greats rom. No unlocked bootloader only means no custom kernels, not roms.
i would like those 100+ people that signed the petition about at&t's block of hsupa instead post on motorola's twitter accounts all day. the only way we MAY get an unlocked bootloader would be for moto to do it.
jruweaver said:
Have faith in the DEVs, I'm voting on option 2!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what if one of those DEVs is the ony who actually told me, and i quote:
"it wont get cracked"
oFUNGUSo said:
what if one of those DEVs is the ony who actually told me, and i quote:
"it wont get cracked"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it depends on which dev said it.
Designgears told me more than once, and everyone else in the IRC channel that we more than likely will not be able to unlock it. Never said it was impossible, but the thing that checks the kernel and recovery, whatever it is, is lower than the bootloader, that is why the bootloader is only signed.
Out of curiosity is it possible at all to OC without cracking the boot loader and loading a new kernel? I'm pretty sure it's not but just double checking.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
DemonWav said:
Designgears told me more than once, and everyone else in the IRC channel that we more than likely will not be able to unlock it. Never said it was impossible, but the thing that checks the kernel and recovery, whatever it is, is lower than the bootloader, that is why the bootloader is only signed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ohhh boy.. That does not sound good at all What to do, what to do?
Give up. It's tilting windmills without a leak from within moto.
I think you mean tilting at windmills, in reference to Don Quixote tilting his lance at a windmill thinking it was an enemy.
All literary references aside, even with a "leak from within moto" the chances of unlocking the bootloader are negligible.
We had all of the documentation and files from Motorola for the Droid devices including efuse implementation and emulation on unsecured hardware, all of component files themselves for both secured and unsecured hardware and all of the firmware builds.
None of it helped unlock the bootloader. We even have the methods and tools for setting and blowing the fuses with RadioComm.
It is irrevocable once set and we have been told that Motorola themselves cannot "unlock" them. All they can do is replace the chip with an unsecured one.
Have a few questions for people on the Droid 3, since I haven't been able to find anything elsewhere. Currently have an Epic 4G on Cricket and was thinking about buying a Droid 3 and going to Page Plus to save money (I don't use a LOT of data, and if I do, I'm usually at work/home, so 100MB should be fine if/when I'm on the road or away form home). I had an original Droid, but needed something with a slightly larger screen, better keyboard, front facing camera, etc (which the Droid 3 now has).
1. Is the Droid 3 locked like the Droid 2/X was? I believe it was an encrypted bootloader or something like that. I know HTC apparently is getting away from using locked bootloaders after massive public backlash. It looked like there were a few bootloaders in the development section. In the end, I'll likely want to jump on the CM train and get their firmware, which may take a while. But like most people at XDA, I don't like running stock ROMs.
2. How is the development area for Droid 3? I know Samsung actually has a public portal for releasing source code to kernels, etc, after the OTA (sometimes right before) is released. Does Moto open source its stuff? Just trying to get a feel for how long it'll be (months vs. weeks) for some ROMs, even if they're just deodexed.
3. Is there a better phone to get than the VZW branded one? I saw one from some nigelelectronics or something like that, which was unlocked (the x860 I believe). I don't mind VZW, since I could put it on PagePlus for $30 a month. Is the $200 extra worth it? Does that mean it'd work on AT&T/T-Mobile (I like T-Mobile's month-to-month plans best) and be capable of getting updates for stuff like CyanogenMod, AOSP ROMs, etc? i.e. are they all really the same hardware and can accept flash's from each other's ROMs, but they have hardware locked in different places (i.e. VZW locks out US GSM carriers in the radio, I thought?). I know Samsung Galaxy S's phones share similar core stuff, but modems, keyboard, cameras, etc, are all different and/or not present, so it makes a common ROM for them all impossible.
Sorry for the novel! Just trying to understand where things are at... Thanks in advance!
The bootloader is encrypted. There will be custom roms for it, but we will be unable to use any kernel other then Motorola's. DX and D2 eventually were hacked with 2nd-init which allowed roms like Cyanogenmod and MIUI to run on them. As far as development for the Droid 3 so far, it's pretty much non existent. We just got our hands on some fastboot recovery files that will allow us to recover from any bricks. Now we need a custom recovery and then the roms will begin to roll out.
Thanks for that! Just a few other quick questions.
Given that -- 2nd init I assume is another kernel (or maybe emulator) that runs after and connects into the encrypted one? Is CM a possibility for Droid 3, I think is the real question (and not a "anything is possible... someone might break the encryption or Moto might unencrypt it).
Also -- any thoughts on the different versions of the phone hardware? All mostly same hardware so the ROMs all work on the same phones? Or totally different? Just curious if anyone has thoughts on this from the differences between Moto Milestone 2 vs Droid 2 (but Droid 3 is the Global version as well, since it has SIM enabled by default... so comparison may not be as good)?
Thanks!
2nd init is not another kernel. Its in the name. it is a second init process over the original init that gives us control over the initialization of the system.
Does that same process work for the Droid 3? Is that a possibility, then? Or is that something known that Moto patched (or maybe potentially left in for developers)?
It took a couple people over a year to successfully get 2nd-init to work properly. I wouldn't expect CM7 or MIUI for quite a while. We will have other roms though. Apex and Liberty used motos kernels on the DX and I have to say they were amazing roms.
Sent from my DROID3 using xda premium
I think CM7 will be adapted to the D3 sooner then many would expect. The Droid X already has it and the bionic has similar hardware. I do not think we will have to wait as long as the Droid X did.
Just checked the updated Motorola page... looks like this device is stuck at android 2.3 forever.
That really sucks, it's gotta be the 512mb memory that's in the device. I knew that would possibly be an issue when I first got the phone. Maybe we can put more pressure on moto to unlock our bootloader so we can get a fully functional ICS (even if it's hacked) on our devices.
Check the link:
http://forums.motorola.com/pages/00add97d6c
PFFFFFFFFFFFFF
I just saw this as well, very disappointing. I wish they would open up development to the community on devices they no longer plan on upgrading/supporting. I know it will never happen...but I can dream
Droid4 and Bionic get the ICS
maybe Hashcode or some one try to do what he can, and pull out from this phones something for us and for CM9 on D3
niko99 said:
Droid4 and Bionic get the ICS
maybe Hashcode or some one try to do what he can, and pull out from this phones something for us and for CM9 on D3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just got a response back from hash regarding this on twitter:
" @danifunker @dhacker29 I have 1 more trick up my sleeve for the D3. And if that doesnt work, then ill drop back to cm7.2 or something. "
Let's hope the tweak works out... but either way I think I could live with CM 7.2, although I would REALLY love running ICS on this phone.
What ever happened to Kexec for the D3? I'll sacrifice a core for a new kernel that could even OC that one to 1.2.
I started to believe that motorola doesn't want anyone to buy motorola products.
calash said:
I just saw this as well, very disappointing. I wish they would open up development to the community on devices they no longer plan on upgrading/supporting. I know it will never happen...but I can dream
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure would be nice if they would just open up phones when they started considering them legacy devices. Other than 4G which I don't particularly need anyway, the D3 is a great phone that could keep going for a long, long time just like my D1 did (I skipped the D2 and went directly from 1 to 3).
Part of the reason the D1 lasted me so long was that I could keep getting updates for it from Cyanogen. In fact I still have it. Though its no longer on the Vzw network I can test various things on it like security software, remote wipes etc over WiFi.
Verizon is probably against unlocking the D3 because they don't want to have the support issues and that's probably why we will never see it. How many people on these forums do you hear about that are constantly returning/exchanging phones that they have managed to kill through tweaking? Then its those same people who complain the loudest when the Motorola and the carriers won't unlock the phones. So, while I wish it was not so, we will probably never see them unlocked unless someone finds a way to hack them. Motorola isn't going to help and particularly VZW is not going to help.
danifunker said:
Just checked the updated Motorola page... looks like this device is stuck at android 2.3 forever.
That really sucks, it's gotta be the 512mb memory that's in the device. I knew that would possibly be an issue when I first got the phone. Maybe we can put more pressure on moto to unlock our bootloader so we can get a fully functional ICS (even if it's hacked) on our devices.
Check the link:
http://forums.motorola.com/pages/00add97d6c
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC just released the HTC Desire C with a 600Mhz processor and 512MB ram. It runs Android 4.0
If they can do it with that, surely Motorola can too
ChristianPreachr said:
HTC just released the HTC Desire C with a 600Mhz processor and 512MB ram. It runs Android 4.0
If they can do it with that, surely Motorola can too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's possible that the HVGA screen on that device needs far less memory - HVGA is 480x320 which is 70% less pixels to push than the qHD on the Droid 3. Also, Moto is pretty terrible at software, Blur runs a lot slower and chews up a lot more memory than a lot of its competitors.
What Moto should do is release a plain vanilla, non-blur ICS as an optional upgrade. I have to think that would take a minimal amount of time to port vanilla ICS to the Droid 3 if there is no need to get it working with Blur - just need the drivers which should be substantially similar to Droid 4.
---------- Post added at 05:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:18 PM ----------
ratman6161 said:
Sure would be nice if they would just open up phones when they started considering them legacy devices. Other than 4G which I don't particularly need anyway, the D3 is a great phone that could keep going for a long, long time just like my D1 did (I skipped the D2 and went directly from 1 to 3).
Part of the reason the D1 lasted me so long was that I could keep getting updates for it from Cyanogen. In fact I still have it. Though its no longer on the Vzw network I can test various things on it like security software, remote wipes etc over WiFi.
Verizon is probably against unlocking the D3 because they don't want to have the support issues and that's probably why we will never see it. How many people on these forums do you hear about that are constantly returning/exchanging phones that they have managed to kill through tweaking? Then its those same people who complain the loudest when the Motorola and the carriers won't unlock the phones. So, while I wish it was not so, we will probably never see them unlocked unless someone finds a way to hack them. Motorola isn't going to help and particularly VZW is not going to help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't they just do what HTC did - online based bootloader unlock tool, which builds a list of unlocked IMEIs which are then voided of their warranty, and people calling for support will be checked against this list. Of course, the most enterprising guys with bricked phones will try to change their IMEI sticker, but that wouldn't match their Verizon account records.
This is so sad... Cant believe that Dual Core Processor phone is not eligable to receive Ice Cream Sandwich... Media shall be contacted, so they could make fun from Motorola... I'm never going to buy Motorola products again.. Ever.
Rlin5741 said:
What Moto should do is release a plain vanilla, non-blur ICS as an optional upgrade. I have to think that would take a minimal amount of time to port vanilla ICS to the Droid 3 if there is no need to get it working with Blur - just need the drivers which should be substantially similar to Droid 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im pretty sure all we need is a compatible kernel and hashcode will take care of the rest. If Motorola could do that, it can extend the life of our phones.
Sent from my XT860 running ICS
Time to do some more Facebook trolling, I may even make an account over on the Motorola forums and do some spamming/trolling.
In July 2011 when I bought my phone there were 2 new Motorola smartphones out there the Droid 3 and Droid X2. Both had dual core processors and felt mid-high end at the time. But somehow an Android OS upgrade that was released less than 6 months after the Droid 3 was released is skipped by Motorola.
This was my first Android phone and I bought it because I wanted a keyboard and really liked the feel of a friends OG Droid. The OG was probably built better but I have still been mostly satisfied with the Droid 3 hardware wise. But I just can't see myself buying another Motorola device. I will have to see what is out there in 2013 when I upgrade, hopefully some nice QWERTY non Motorola devices.
Damn it Verizon
This is the Fourth phone that I've had from Verizon that has been abandoned before the end of it's life cycle. Although I am sure this is Motorola's fault I will curse Verizon for all time and remember to get the latest and greatest for top dollar right off the bat to ensure that I will get updates when dealing with a cell phone company or maybe get a landline and tell jerks like Verizon to stick it where the sun don't shine. The real pisser is that I am finding this out the day after I spent the money that could have been used to buy out my contract. Color me angry and frustrated.
I'm going to start reading up about custom roms for this phone I might as well since support is all but gone from this model.
Return the phone and tell them you want out. Can be done.
Sent from my DROID3 using xda premium
spunker88 said:
Time to do some more Facebook trolling, I may even make an account over on the Motorola forums and do some spamming/trolling.
In July 2011 when I bought my phone there were 2 new Motorola smartphones out there the Droid 3 and Droid X2. Both had dual core processors and felt mid-high end at the time. But somehow an Android OS upgrade that was released less than 6 months after the Droid 3 was released is skipped by Motorola.
This was my first Android phone and I bought it because I wanted a keyboard and really liked the feel of a friends OG Droid. The OG was probably built better but I have still been mostly satisfied with the Droid 3 hardware wise. But I just can't see myself buying another Motorola device. I will have to see what is out there in 2013 when I upgrade, hopefully some nice QWERTY non Motorola devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please don't troll that forum. The mods there aren't actualy affiliated with moto like you think.
I did some of this back in the day about the d2 and learned the hard way.
Sent from my DROID3 using xda premium
It seems to me that this phone has reached death. All the forums seemed to have died (here,droidhive,rootzwiki,android-den(which hasn't really taken off) and where ever else) and quite frankly I'm disappointed. There really hasn't been any steps forward in ICS since I don't even know when (hw codecs/bluetooth/whatever else). Unfortunately I'm still 9 months away from upgrading.
I don't mean to sound like I'm complaining because I really do appreciate all of the dev work thus far(Hashcode, sparkyman, and others are the shiz), but its like we've hit a brick wall. ICS isn't complete and won't be and gingerbread doesn't seem good enough. I am grateful of everyones work. I just wish more Could be done.
Sent from my XT862 using xda app-developers app
This was my first android phone and obviously a mistake. Not that I should have gotten an iprison(I am anti I everything). I hope progress can be made. At this point though I'm sure Motorola Was and Is a mistake and I should have known better previously owning a Q9C.
Sent from my XT862 using xda app-developers app
This should be in general
Sent from my XT860 using xda premium
Endoroid said:
This should be in general
Sent from my XT860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why? It's about the development - the phone itself isnt dead.
But I agree. I was hoping to use this phone for 2 years (using 0.5 year now). I thought that eventually, we'd get ICS like we deserve. Guess not . I'm not sure how fast/supported this phone will be using gingerbread in 1.5 year
and except Droid 4 and RAZR MAXX..what other options we've got?!
galaxy no way (too big and overrated), and HTCs are all the same: big and no qwerty. nothing to get out of the crowd...like RAZR MAXX.
i used to be a fan of HTC, since S710 days..but now i'm bored by their lack of originality. no qwerty and no good processors for the small ones (<4" display).
not really dead everyone just faced the fact that ics will not happen for the d3 and blame the lack of ram for it..although we have proven that the d3 does and can handle ics and it does improve it no dev will continue to develop it due to the locked bootloader and the work involved to write all new kernals and bypasses fir it..there are 2 great gb roms in development..team haters (my fav) and mavrom{my 2nd fav}..both development crews hang out on droidforums stop by say hi and give their roms a whirl
Because its not development, its venting about our forgotten phone. And while I feel the same as you, its still not development
Sent from my XT860 using xda premium
I noticed the same thing but dont really mind.
Im on a ATT contract for another year and 4 months or so.
Ive always wanted a droid and got the droid 3 because it works on att. It has to be the best sliding keyboard phone out their, and beats using any virtual keyboard IMO.
Even if development isnt strong, we have got it better then a lot of other phones. We have stable gingerbread roms and we can overclock it.
The Droid 3 is still a good phone and i know il be getting a good year of use out of it. .. hopefully then keyboard phones come back to life...
But i never used to post really on these forums but seeing they are kind of dead, i decided to become as active as i can to help around.
Is the droid three dead? Yes, in a way. The phone's bootloader is locked. This is the ONLY thing that is stopping any major developments on the Droid 3. If Moto, or google at this point, decided to unlock the phone... We would have Ice Cream sandwich 100% working (provided that they released the source code as well), and we would be eagerly looking forward to Jelly Bean. I often go on the Google+ Google account and harass them, I know I won't win but I am always hoping for a miracle.
As it stands now, there is a large chance that I will leave Verizon when my contract is up. Their handling of this phone as well as their pocketbooks has left a bad taste in my mouth. After 6/28/2012 (my birthday of all things), any phone being upgraded via contract will LOOSE their UNLIMITED data. You will have to purchase phones off contract to be able to keep your unlimited plan (It's only like $400 for a good android phone). Not only that, you will be charged a $30 fee just to upgrade.
So in conclusion:
Our phone is on life support. We are getting by with such developers as TeamHaters, Maverick, and Hashcode (who's still realasing AOKP updates for our phones), who are doing an excellent job keeping our phones working the best they can with what they have. Until there is a cure for our Bootloader issue... Our phone is stuck in intensive care, and Patch Adams is their to annoy the hell out of it.
Does anyone think googles new PDK will help our device? its supposed to allow low level api for easier porting of android to hardware. Think this could bring around any fixes? Ofcourse the bootloader will be locked but it mite make the making of kernels not take 6-8 months as hash said and help him out.
Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2
jesusishere said:
This is the ONLY thing that is stopping any major developments on the Droid 3. If Moto, or google at this point, decided to unlock the phone... We would have Ice Cream sandwich 100% working (provided that they released the source code as well), and we would be eagerly looking forward to Jelly Bean.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*sigh* I hate to be the one that has to come in and burst everyone's bubble every time someone makes this argument, but the problem is not the locked bootloader. If the bootloader was unlocked, we'd be in the same exact position. Hashcode has stated this several times. We'd still be without hardware codecs, we'd still be having Bluetooth issues, we'd still have all the same issues because they're all a matter of hardware limitations or lack of documentation on certain parts of the proprietary hardware.
Pokelover980 said:
*sigh* I hate to be the one that has to come in and burst everyone's bubble every time someone makes this argument, but the problem is not the locked bootloader. If the bootloader was unlocked, we'd be in the same exact position. Hashcode has stated this several times. We'd still be without hardware codecs, we'd still be having Bluetooth issues, we'd still have all the same issues because they're all a matter of hardware limitations or lack of documentation on certain parts of the proprietary hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's the combination between the bootloader and the source code
Sent from my XT862 using xda premium
jesusishere said:
It's the combination between the bootloader and the source code
Sent from my XT862 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's more of a "TI doesn't support hardware codecs for devices >1GB data". TI doesn't release source code for those binaries and isn't obliged to, so that's not really an argument that should be made. It's simply that our phone was cursed from release.
EDIT: And as of now I can no longer say "our phone" as I jumped ship to the Razr... goodbye, Droid 3 community, you will be missed...
When Ics gets released this year for droid it is getting better
Sent from my DROID3 using XDA
Nope, it's not, because ICS isn't going to be released to D3. This is it, for better or worse.
Rocking with my M3 and XDA app
AragornPE said:
Nope, it's not, because ICS isn't going to be released to D3. This is it, for better or worse.
Rocking with my M3 and XDA app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
who cares. I had ICS on a device before and its not that different besides a different interface .. after using ICS i prefer gingerbread's layout..
Juicy555 said:
who cares. I had ICS on a device before and its not that different besides a different interface .. after using ICS i prefer gingerbread's layout..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ICS is majorly different from previous releases under the hood. It uses a different kernel; things have been made more efficient; the APIs have been updated to allow for more possibilities for app developers; certain parts of how the system overall operates have undergone drastic resigns; etc.. All of this came at the price of needing better hardware to incorporate new features, but I say it was well worth it and is a very large difference even without the interface changes.
Pokelover980 said:
*sigh* I hate to be the one that has to come in and burst everyone's bubble every time someone makes this argument, but the problem is not the locked bootloader. If the bootloader was unlocked, we'd be in the same exact position. Hashcode has stated this several times. We'd still be without hardware codecs, we'd still be having Bluetooth issues, we'd still have all the same issues because they're all a matter of hardware limitations or lack of documentation on certain parts of the proprietary hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but anyway hashcode would be able to trial and error approach without deeming the device unusable (loading kernels, and modules and stuff)
it would certainly help to have an unlocked bootloader.
but without source of course it would be time consuming and without knowing when it would have success
bogdan_wrc said:
galaxy no way (too big and overrated), and HTCs are all the same: big ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thing is a brick in my pocket compared to galaxy line and most htc phones, check out the quad core HTC One X w/beats audio or the galaxy note etc for "originality" but seems like all manufacturers are using a very similar forum factor. I agree the qwerty is nice to have but it doubles the size of the phone as well(unless maybe desire z) so you kind of have to choose.
Willis111 said:
This thing is a brick in my pocket compared to galaxy line and most htc phones, check out the quad core HTC One X w/beats audio or the galaxy note etc for "originality" but seems like all manufacturers are using a very similar forum factor. I agree the qwerty is nice to have but it doubles the size of the phone as well(unless maybe desire z) so you kind of have to choose.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I came from one of those phones and dont mind the difference. In fact the keyboard is one of the best features ive had on any of my smartphones. And a 4" is perfect for me, coming from a 4.5" screen.
Is it possible to port over Nexus 4 ROMs (including 4.4 KitKat) to HTC First? HTC has released the kernel source code for our phones. I like the Nexus experience, and don't really want CM. If HTC made Nexus handsets for Google I would have bought that instead, but the minimalist nature of the First really appeals to me.
r00tb33r said:
Is it possible to port over Nexus 4 ROMs (including 4.4 KitKat) to HTC First? HTC has released the kernel source code for our phones. I like the Nexus experience, and don't really want CM. If HTC made Nexus handsets for Google I would have bought that instead, but the minimalist nature of the First really appeals to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
um that isnt quite as easy as you think. porting cm is easier cause our phone has hardware relatives like the HTC One mini which use the same drivers and stuff like that. also our screen size matches the One mini so porting it would be as easy as 1-2-3. it does take time but it will be a hell of alot faster than BUILDING an AOSP rom. to make aosp work 1, you would need screensize and other hardware compatibility, then 2, the rom was never made for htc and 3, there is not flashable zip of the stock rom to base the OS off of, so it would requre alot more work. trust me , cm and and aosp arent much different so dont worry.
russian392 said:
um that isnt quite as easy as you think. porting cm is easier cause our phone has hardware relatives like the HTC One mini which use the same drivers and stuff like that. also our screen size matches the One mini so porting it would be as easy as 1-2-3. it does take time but it will be a hell of alot faster than BUILDING an AOSP rom. to make aosp work 1, you would need screensize and other hardware compatibility, then 2, the rom was never made for htc and 3, there is not flashable zip of the stock rom to base the OS off of, so it would requre alot more work. trust me , cm and and aosp arent much different so dont worry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since I have no experience porting Android I can't say that you are incorrect, but isn't the binary architecture of applications the same (ARMv7-A Krait instruction set?), the screen is reasonably similar (1280x720 vs 1280x768, or Nexus 4 having 48 extra pixels on the width in portrait mode). Basically, it's not possible to just stick our device-specific kernel (and kernel modules, aka drivers) in there and have everything else just work? Before Android, I had no problems compiling a new Linux kernel for my distro with new options and applications worked just fine.
By the way, HTC promised a 4.4 KitKat update for HTC One Mini which AFAIK is 95% same as our First. Would it be possible to port that ROM? I'd still prefer Nexus though.
Yeah it would be possible to port 4.4 from the the One Mini, I'm not to sure how stable it would be though I'd foresee the usual bluetooth,camera,wifi issues.
Kendosis said:
Yeah it would be possible to port 4.4 from the the One Mini, I'm not to sure how stable it would be though I'd foresee the usual bluetooth,camera,wifi issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would there be bluetooth/camera/wifi issues? We would use our own kernel with correctly configured modules. Both First and One Mini kernel source is out, can't we just run a comparison to see what's different? From the look of it they use the same Linux kernel release, so differences should be few (at least no false positives from different module versions). If newer Android builds will use newer Linux kernel, we can add those differences that we will know of after we do the First vs One Mini source comparison.
I think running the patch program would be an easy way to find the affected source files, as files with no differences will generate no patch lines.
Kendosis said:
Yeah it would be possible to port 4.4 from the the One Mini, I'm not to sure how stable it would be though I'd foresee the usual bluetooth,camera,wifi issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a darn LG. It would like either 1. Take for ever or 2. Impossible
We are using an HTC lol
Sent from my HTC first using xda app-developers app
russian392 said:
It's a darn LG. It would like either 1. Take for ever or 2. Impossible
We are using an HTC lol
Sent from my HTC first using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't follow what you mean about incompatibility of LG. It's still the same CPU architecture, and neither the Linux kernel nor the Android operating system are the developments of LG. Explain please.
I'm a computer engineer with a bit of custom hardware core development experience for embedded systems running Linux. I just don't see why there's a problem swapping out all the hardware-specific stuff from underneath Android as long as CPU architecture remains the same.
I have years of Linux experience, just not Android-specific.
r00tb33r said:
I don't follow what you mean about incompatibility of LG. It's still the same CPU architecture, and neither the Linux kernel nor the Android operating system are the developments of LG. Explain please.
I'm a computer engineer with a bit of custom hardware core development experience for embedded systems running Linux. I just don't see why there's a problem swapping out all the hardware-specific stuff from underneath Android as long as CPU architecture remains the same.
I have years of Linux experience, just not Android-specific.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well.
1. ive seen people try, its not as easy as it seems.
2. think of it as windows. you install it on your pc, it will take another several hours just to download and install various drivers and software for your hardware.
the thing is not just in the android OS. the os should be able to auto adapt itself to any android capable device. BUT we have to consider 1. drivers for the adreno 305 and the snapdragon 400. we also need kernel/baseband capability. the nexus is pretty much a BLANK device with absolutely nothing on it, and they install a stock kernel and stock rom. we would have to go in and make the kernel work, which hopefuly we can just use a ready built one, and then tweak the rom + kernel to fit the harware, whcih will include the capatative side of the screen, and camera, and everything else, and the ram. and that. although technicaly some of it will be there, its not as easy as you might think.
edit
see, ive worked on an ARMv6 device, and its like much harder than an ARMv7 which has alot of similarities. and mind you, im not saying its IMPOSSIBLE, and im not saying its extremely hard. im sure it can be done, but porting cm form a mimic device like the One Mini would be easier than a Nexus 4, or a Nexus 5 at that.
here. maybe this will make my point clear...its not easy eve for big companies, not just for a single person
http://www.androidcentral.com/why-you-ll-never-have-latest-version-android
Wouldn't it be easier and more connivent to port from the HTC one xl? It does have a good amount of great ROMs
abrahammmmmmm_ said:
Wouldn't it be easier and more connivent to port from the HTC one xl? It does have a good amount of great ROMs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its not the ROM, gosh. its the HARDWARE. the One mini has pretty much identical hardware, therefore its easier. if we can atleast get ONE rom ported successfully everything else would be much easier cause the that rom could be used as a base for other ports...
the XL, well the major difference is the adreno 225 vs our 305, plus we have more sensors...
so um...posibly? you could give it ago if you want
russian392 said:
its not the ROM, gosh. its the HARDWARE. the One mini has pretty much identical hardware, therefore its easier. if we can atleast get ONE rom ported successfully everything else would be much easier cause the that rom could be used as a base for other ports...
the XL, well the major difference is the adreno 225 vs our 305, plus we have more sensors...
so um...posibly? you could give it ago if you want
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you mean, but I wasn't really aware of the great difference of the adreno 225 & 305. When checking it out I only heard there was some very minor tweaks done to the 225 to get the 305. And I'd actually give it a go if it wasn't for how easily this phone bricks, I guess I'll just have to be patient and wait to see what our great devs we've got can whip up for now
russian392 said:
its not the ROM, gosh. its the HARDWARE. the One mini has pretty much identical hardware, therefore its easier. if we can atleast get ONE rom ported successfully everything else would be much easier cause the that rom could be used as a base for other ports...
the XL, well the major difference is the adreno 225 vs our 305, plus we have more sensors...
so um...posibly? you could give it ago if you want
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Modern operating systems are built on the principle of abstraction layers. The *nix kernels place devices as memory pointers on the filesystem tree (they are not files however in the literal sense), so you can swap out hardware and kernel but maintaining the same pointer names and your upper level application won't care at all, as a matter of fact it may not even know it runs on different hardware from before. The "ROM" that you download and flash onto your device is not monolithic, it's made up of components and the Linux kernel and Android OS, and the rest of the applications are separate parts. You should be able swap out the hardware specific layer, otherwise the design of the OS won't be worth a damn.
From user's perspective however "ROM" means something else, it means a specific set of features, be it pre-installed apps, eyecandy (like Sense or Touchwiz), or other miscellaneous bloatware. Basically it's a snapshot of an environment, which defines the user experience. HTC has their own tailored user experience which they ship with their phones like the One mini, with Sense, and probably some carrier restrictions (like custom restricted Wi-Fi tethering on AT&T). HTC first, because it's a product manufactured FOR Facebook, and marketed as A Facebook phone, has a different user experience from typical HTC products. Samsung has their own tailored user experience with their own apps and Touchwiz. Finally LG makes their own phones too, however the Nexus device they make for Google is a Google product, and Google tailors the user experience for their product. I like Google's vision of the smartphone user experience (I had a Nexus One before), and that's what I want to achieve with the current phone. True, that I could have bought a Nexus 4, however HTC's hardware design allows me to do things that are seemingly impossible with LG... Like swapping the IMEI (don't ask).
Not everybody wants their user experience be of HTC or CM flavor. Please be respectful of that. Arguing against wishes of others accomplishes nothing.
I believe it's clear enough that One mini updates can AND WILL be ported to our phone, there is no point to discuss that further in the context of THIS thread.
r00tb33r said:
Modern operating systems are built on the principle of abstraction layers. The *nix kernels place devices as memory pointers on the filesystem tree (they are not files however in the literal sense), so you can swap out hardware and kernel but maintaining the same pointer names and your upper level application won't care at all, as a matter of fact it may not even know it runs on different hardware from before. The "ROM" that you download and flash onto your device is not monolithic, it's made up of components and the Linux kernel and Android OS, and the rest of the applications are separate parts. You should be able swap out the hardware specific layer, otherwise the design of the OS won't be worth a damn.
From user's perspective however "ROM" means something else, it means a specific set of features, be it pre-installed apps, eyecandy (like Sense or Touchwiz), or other miscellaneous bloatware. Basically it's a snapshot of an environment, which defines the user experience. HTC has their own tailored user experience which they ship with their phones like the One mini, with Sense, and probably some carrier restrictions (like custom restricted Wi-Fi tethering on AT&T). HTC first, because it's a product manufactured FOR Facebook, and marketed as A Facebook phone, has a different user experience from typical HTC products. Samsung has their own tailored user experience with their own apps and Touchwiz. Finally LG makes their own phones too, however the Nexus device they make for Google is a Google product, and Google tailors the user experience for their product. I like Google's vision of the smartphone user experience (I had a Nexus One before), and that's what I want to achieve with the current phone. True, that I could have bought a Nexus 4, however HTC's hardware design allows me to do things that are seemingly impossible with LG... Like swapping the IMEI (don't ask).
Not everybody wants their user experience be of HTC or CM flavor. Please be respectful of that. Arguing against wishes of others accomplishes nothing.
I believe it's clear enough that One mini updates can AND WILL be ported to our phone, there is no point to discuss that further in the context of THIS thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. SWAPPING IMEI IS ILLEGAL
2. You are correct, htc has some briliant hardware but the nexus 5 is a monster now haha
3. Go get the stock aosp android rom (4.2 or 4.3) then get a kernel for our phones, and flash it....see what you get and PLEASE let me know if it works cause i highly doubt it.
4. The reason why i duscussed the One Mini ports, is because if they are successfull, you can use them as a basis for for other ports like a nexus 4 port. and it doesnt have to be a nexus 4 port, it can be anything else, just at the moment, so far we have ZERO roms that boot, one bricked phone because of a blind build, and what you basicaly want is a blind build of a nexus 4 rom...so if youre willing to put your phone on the line, go right ahead.
russian392 said:
1. SWAPPING IMEI IS ILLEGAL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2216371
russian392 said:
1. SWAPPING IMEI IS ILLEGAL
2. You are correct, htc has some briliant hardware but the nexus 5 is a monster now haha
3. Go get the stock aosp android rom (4.2 or 4.3) then get a kernel for our phones, and flash it....see what you get and PLEASE let me know if it works cause i highly doubt it.
4. The reason why i duscussed the One Mini ports, is because if they are successfull, you can use them as a basis for for other ports like a nexus 4 port. and it doesnt have to be a nexus 4 port, it can be anything else, just at the moment, so far we have ZERO roms that boot, one bricked phone because of a blind build, and what you basicaly want is a blind build of a nexus 4 rom...so if youre willing to put your phone on the line, go right ahead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Depends, still, don't do it. I don't tell others to do it, and won't say how even if asked. But that's a feature I need hence why I choose HTC.
2. More than I need.
3. When I get around it. Fortunately it's possible to unbrick these if something goes terribly wrong (I have the JTAG pinout for this device). I am waiting on a new JTAG box from the team before I release the pinout to public... Unless of course anyone wants to donate a new box or badass logic probe or a very high speed digital oscilloscope.
4. Of course the One mini port will happen before any others because it will take the least time, however not all of us want to use it.