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.
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?
At present, we have topics every few weeks or so with someone new, coming to ask if GSM works in America. Then, someone wants to help and try to figure out why -- but there is no consistent thread for this. So let's use this.
Does the Droid 4 work in the US on GSM yet? NO
This is to be used as a master thread to post research/thoughts/findings. If anyone has any clever thoughts, please search the thread first to make sure it hasn't been found yet.
What we do know is that with OTA ICS from Verizon, the Droid 4 supports GSM for *OTHER* carriers outside of the US. There could be any number of reasons that it does NOT work. As a quick run-down of the problem, I'll identify where the primary issues could be and allow for anyone else to build upon it, ask questions, and discuss.
The Radio Firmware
-- The firmware for the radio itself could have a lock or a setting that needs to be adjusted and all data requests are blocked through this.
RIL
-- The interface between the radio and Android -- there could be a software lock here that restricts specific carrier ID's.
ROM
-- The ROM itself has a baked-in block for GSM in America.
The best thing we can do is to try and identify or step through the stack (if such is possible -- I'm a developer, but not for Android) and see WHERE the calls break at.
--If it is a software lock in the ROM, then aftermarket ROM's like CyanogenMod should allow data to work in the US. If we're not seeing this, then this is likely not the case.
--If it is a software lock in the RIL library, then we'd have to have a reverse-engineered library (which could be very difficult to do). We should be getting some kind of error somewhere in here. At this point, though, it's hard to tell if the Radio Firmware or RIL is the actual problem.
Anyone with any background on this, please feel free to contribute. correct, and update. I'll try to get back here and update this master page as I see responses further in the thread.
Can we try to load up a deodexed rom and replace the ril file with, let's say one from XT910 in canada?
Sent from my XT894 running ICS
I assume this is just a GSM radio, without HSPA+, but does anyone know the frequencies it uses?
I just finished comparing a Droid RAZR XT912 to a Rogers RAZR XT910, I checked the /system/lib folder and build.prop files.
I found some really interesting differences, and also found that most of the important build.prop differences between the Rogers XT910 and Verizon XT912 were also consistent with the D4.
lines like:
persist.ril.modem.mode = (1 = CDMA, 2= UMTS)
persist.ril.mux.noofchannels = (10 on Rogers, 8 on VZW)
persist.radio.ap.phonetype = (1 = GSM, 2= CDMA)
and my favourite line
persist.ril.features = (0x182 = Rogers, 0x90A = Verizon)
I also found something only in Rogers build.prop:
ro.tether.denied=false
What's also interesting, is that most of the files in the /lib folder is consistent between the D4 and the RAZR, I have also included this report in the attached ZIP file.
Maybe this in combination with some files from the /lib folder might help. Either way, I've included my comparisons in the attached ZIP.
Does anybody want to just try changing the persist.ril.features in the US and see what happens??
Let's get US bands unlocked soon!!!
In my comparissions,
D:\ = XT894
G:\ = XT912
H:\ = XT910
I saw these and a couple other changes comparing the D4 file to the bionic GSM-working ICS leak build.prop. Unfortnately I'm studying for a GRE exam I have tomorrow but will try to give these changes a try when I take a break and if not, definitely by the end of tomorrow. I'm starting to have faith we'll find something. I don't think Verzion did anything that low-level to implement this US carrier block.
Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk
blackstar1744 said:
I saw these and a couple other changes comparing the D4 file to the bionic GSM-working ICS leak build.prop. Unfortnately I'm studying for a GRE exam I have tomorrow but will try to give these changes a try when I take a break and if not, definitely by the end of tomorrow. I'm starting to have faith we'll find something. I don't think Verzion did anything that low-level to implement this US carrier block.
Sent from my SGH-T839 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
School first, xda second. Good luck on your GRE!
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using Tapatalk 2
Trying to get Radiocomm to recognize my phone but my phone keeps switching to mass storage mode even with Android debugging and mock location enabled. Was in Hashcode's AOKP and went back to the stock ROM and now I can stay in Media Device (MTP) but still don't have the appropriate Windows x64 driver. I'm currently running the attached file which I came across at some point in the Android Development forum in my earlier research into this whole domestic GSM issue. Does anyone else have another x64 driver?
The motivation for my question: Yesterday ariethekid claimed to get T-Mobile working on his Droid Bionic running Verizon's official ICS 246 release so the steps on this page *should* work - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1297714&page=13 along with the appropriate build.prop modifications. The bionic build.prop I attached includes the necessary changes. They would have to be included migrated to the D4 build.prop and I would/will eventually do it but I'm just not that far along yet given my Radiocomm issues.
Update: The OTA ICS updates already includes this 8 byte revision. I believe the only thing that needs to be done is the update of the build.prop.
blackstar1744 said:
Trying to get Radiocomm to recognize my phone but my phone keeps switching to mass storage mode even with Android debugging and mock location enabled. Was in Hashcode's AOKP and went back to the stock ROM and now I can stay in Media Device (MTP) but still don't have the appropriate Windows x64 driver. I'm currently running the attached file which I came across at some point in the Android Development forum in my earlier research into this whole domestic GSM issue. Does anyone else have another x64 driver?
The motivation for my question: Yesterday ariethekid claimed to get T-Mobile working on his Droid Bionic running Verizon's official ICS 246 release so the steps on this page *should* work - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1297714&page=13 along with the appropriate build.prop modifications. The bionic build.prop I attached includes the necessary changes. They would have to be included migrated to the D4 build.prop and I would/will eventually do it but I'm just not that far along yet given my Radiocomm issues.
Update: The OTA ICS updates already includes this 8 byte revision. I believe the only thing that needs to be done is the update of the build.prop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In order to get the RadioComm interface, make sure you're using the latest Motorola Mobile Phone Drivers (these are different than the android drivers), they are version 5.9 as of right now. Please download them from here :
https://developer.motorola.com/tools/usb_drivers/
Looks like the Motorola site is down though, so you can download them from here :
http://handheld.softpedia.com/get/Drivers/Motorola-Handset-USB-Driver-for-Windows-64-bit-38124.shtml
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33230579
this was just posted, has all NV lines together, maybe we can figure it out in here!
dewhashish said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33230579
this was just posted, has all NV lines together, maybe we can figure it out in here!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a thought. Perhaps these values could be checked against a Bionic?
4869^"GSM Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4870^"GSM 850 Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4871^"GSM DCS Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4872^"GSM 1900 Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
blackstar1744 said:
Just a thought. Perhaps these values could be checked against a Bionic?
4869^"GSM Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4870^"GSM 850 Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4871^"GSM DCS Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
4872^"GSM 1900 Carrier Suppression"^"GSM*"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would have better luck posting this question in that forum.
By the way, Bionic GSM is a go. They have it fully up and running in that thread. Confirmed working by quite a few users
danifunker tried that already and folks have posted results in this topic (and it didn't work, apparently):
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1916869
Apparently, it does not apply to GSM in the US:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=32478552&postcount=21
They, however, did not try to toggle 4869. They did 4870 - 4872. Apparently the Bionic ignores those keys and does not worry about it.
Has anyone actually tried, for sure, to toggle these settings and verify whether they work or not?
D4 for US GSM Bump
Hello out there?
Has anyone come up or been experimenting on how to get the domestic U.S. carriers unblocked on the Droid 4? I've been searching high and low and apparently the Bionic fixes do not work on the D4.
daqueenzkid said:
Hello out there?
Has anyone come up or been experimenting on how to get the domestic U.S. carriers unblocked on the Droid 4? I've been searching high and low and apparently the Bionic fixes do not work on the D4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite a few poked around, but there hasn't been any progress in the past few months. If this phone had more support, I'm sure it could be figured out, but not like this. It does take brilliant minds at work to figure this stuff out.
Sent from my SGH-I927 using Tapatalk 2
gtmaster303 said:
Quite a few poked around, but there hasn't been any progress in the past few months. If this phone had more support, I'm sure it could be figured out, but not like this. It does take brilliant minds at work to figure this stuff out.
Sent from my SGH-I927 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are some people looking into it but it is absurdly complicated. Granted they keep moving closer to a solution, this is the most complicated phone workaround I've ever seen. Motorola/Verizon is straight evil.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2144335
Sent from my XT894 using Tapatalk 2
blackstar1744 said:
There are some people looking into it but it is absurdly complicated. Granted they keep moving closer to a solution, this is the most complicated phone workaround I've ever seen. Motorola/Verizon is straight evil.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2144335
Sent from my XT894 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea that's definitely apparent. That's a brand new thread. Haven't seen it before. Those guys are doing alright
Sent from my SGH-I927 using Tapatalk 2
You can try my Rom.
I edited all settings about CDMA to GSM not only build.prop but I'm not in USA so I can not try.
droid bionic gsm unlock
Hey guys. Ive been on XDA for so long and never reslly mentioned that the gsm on my droid bionic on ICS is unlocked. Ive tried alot of methods but one method i used finally worked. i just pop a non verizon sim card in and it works 100%. txt etc.
What is this method?
It's been known and well established that the MDM6600 radio on Bionic, in particular the hardware revision A first production devices, do not have the block on US GSM carriers that the subsequent RAZR/D4 models have and can be made to work with a few simple modifications.
This does not apply to the RAZR/D4 and after a great deal of examination it has been determined that the block is in the signed BP radio image and cannot be disabled via NV editing nor any other means.
Hey guys! I have been scouting around for Note 8 help but thought it was time to join myself.
Hopefully if I am able to solve my specific problem or get my questions asked it can help someone else.
Specifically, right now, I picked up and refurbished a Samsung Galaxy Note 8 since I have one currently that is phenominal, and wanted one in the back pocket in case anything happens but it is locked to ATT, which isnt the real problem. The real problem is that it is still on Android 7.1.1 and I would like to get it to Android 9 Pie.
I am unsure of a few things like whether I need all updates between 7 and 9, or if I can jump straight to it. But things of that sort.
It sucks that its ATT locked but I feel its worse that its on old Android since I refurbed it, (fixed screen and replaced with fresh samsung battery) but its being held back in certain functional capabilities. Either way, I am a techy, not yet able to solder, but definitely able to troubleshoot my way around a Windows Blue screen of death.
Looking forward to learnin more!
MethudMann said:
Hey guys! I have been scouting around for Note 8 help but thought it was time to join myself.
Hopefully if I am able to solve my specific problem or get my questions asked it can help someone else.
Specifically, right now, I picked up and refurbished a Samsung Galaxy Note 8 since I have one currently that is phenominal, and wanted one in the back pocket in case anything happens but it is locked to ATT, which isnt the real problem. The real problem is that it is still on Android 7.1.1 and I would like to get it to Android 9 Pie.
I am unsure of a few things like whether I need all updates between 7 and 9, or if I can jump straight to it. But things of that sort.
It sucks that its ATT locked but I feel its worse that its on old Android since I refurbed it, (fixed screen and replaced with fresh samsung battery) but its being held back in certain functional capabilities. Either way, I am a techy, not yet able to solder, but definitely able to troubleshoot my way around a Windows Blue screen of death.
Looking forward to learnin more!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome to XDA! As for updating your phone, could you please tell me your model number?
ethical_haquer said:
Welcome to XDA! As for updating your phone, could you please tell me your model number?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, sorry for long response time.
For the important info:
Model: SM-N950U
Android. 7.1.1
Build:NMF26X.N950USQU1AQH7
CSC: ATT
I'll monitor more closely so let me know if you need any other info
MethudMann said:
Yeah, sorry for long response time.
For the important info:
Model: SM-N950U
Android. 7.1.1
Build:NMF26X.N950USQU1AQH7
CSC: ATT
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, there are two versions of firmware available for your device. One is "branded" and has carrier bloat, whereas the other does not have carrier bloat but might have issues with VoLTE (probably not, but there is a chance). What one would you prefer? Let me know if you have any questions regarding the difference.
ethical_haquer said:
Alright, there are two versions of firmware available for your device. One is "branded" and has carrier bloat, whereas the other does not have carrier bloat but might have issues with VoLTE (probably not, but there is a chance). What one would you prefer? Let me know if you have any questions regarding the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the research and yes I do have questions if its not too much of an issue:
1.) Carrier bloat is like the usual and can just be deleted anyways correct?
2.) In what scenarios (in case everything was working fine with OTA updates) would the phone have downloaded a version without bloat?
3.) Would updating to the non-bloated version cause any issues since the phone is still carrier locked?
4.) Lastly, for the firmware, would I need to download multiple updates until that point or just straight to the firmware?
If not, I can research the answers as I have been on it on and off for a month with research but other than that, you're a god send.
By the way, if #1 is true, I'll just take the bloatware no doubt just to be as safe as possible.
Thanks again for all the help @ethical_haquer
Been busy researching in the Samsung Note 8 ATT threads and I was able to find the answer to number 4 in that using Full ODIN files is a complete flash and different than just an update which requires the previous updates.
The answer to number 3 from what I have seen no. The only thing is that certain features may NOT work such as VoLTE; pretty much you already answered 3 and I was literally too dumb to see that until I started writing this message. *face palm
Question 2 is pretty much inconsequential so don't worry answering that. Its was just curiosity. But for anyone who does see this possibly, my speculation is that NO, the carrier version would never download the non-carrier version. The non-branded update is for those unlocked phones that receive over-the-air (OTA) updates that were not associated with any carrier, in other words buying a phone directly from samsung's website.
For 1, I am guessing it is "Yes" since I was able to do that in the past with all my other phones. But either way it is not a make it or break it so it doesn't matter.
I have been able to find some full ODIN files for the updates I was looking for, so will be attempting my first flash soon. Will be posting all my findings to the thread I was reading just to potentially help anyone else (though rare since this device is getting real old) who has the same questions I had and I can get them up to speed without having to search everything
Just finished flashing the ATT Note 8 to and the Answer to Number 1 is that NO, you cannot Uninstall the bloatware
Again, will post all these findings to the proper thread in after completed
Sorry for the late reply! I would try installing the firmware for the SM-N950U1 (notice the 1). It should work and won't have carrier bloat.
ethical_haquer said:
Sorry for the late reply! I would try installing the firmware for the SM-N950U1 (notice the 1). It should work and won't have carrier bloat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're all good!
I may but I actually have to find one more update I am looking for (Full ODIN FILES). My daily driver note 8 is on N950USQS7DTE5 and it is a T-Mobile Version (though it bein g TMO is inconsequential at the moment. Just thought I might mention it).
That is the update I would like for ATT just so that I know there wont be any differences (or less differences) between my daily driver and this.This is me being picky at this point but isn't the point of life getting what you want? I found one update above that but different bootloader. So for whatever reason may happen, no going back.
What I currently flashed to was N950USQS3BRA8 so it's still on Android 7.1.1 but I did this just to test to the process (my first flashing). Now I am ready.
So I will look for that then flash it and update as usual
Just found, or couldnt find, that ATT has the same update so will just go with what I have. Close as I can get