Related
Or rather lack of it.
I start of by saying, i am not a dev.
But i see that the way rom's is made for Galaxy lack's most of the things that makes custom rom's good, SGS's rom's seem more themes than proper custom rom's.
I have used Nexus and some of the great rom's to that device.
The SGS way to update FW seems to stop all real development?
What do you think?
samsung's drivers are encrypted and this makes developing roms pretty difficult. there can only be roms based on samsung releases. at least this is what i understood .
i am sure that the growing user base of this great phone will bring more attention from great developers ( hi paul ! , who will be able to overcome most of the problems and give us great roms.
The final non-beta firmware from Samsung hasn't even arrived yet! Give it some time!
Custom roms now would be obsolete within one week because of a newer official beta Firmware.
I was aware that a few days ago paul obrien was having a conversation to cyanogen about creating a vendor tree for the sgs which would enable us to use cyanogen mod. If someone can confirm this with paul this would be very good news for us sgs owners.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
The only reason I ditched the N1 is because Google have said there would be no N2 so I figured I find another phone.
Now I realise how bad fragmentation is, the iPhone really doesn't look so bad again ... (previous to the N1, I was on a iPhone 3G)
It's a pity vendors can't be mandated to supply optional vanilla ROMs - I know Samsung have released a bunch of source code, maybe that's a start.
I guess I'll give it six months. I'm an end-user who wants an easy life, but appreciates the potential and integration with google services that Android provides - moreso in its vanilla form.
Did anybody try compiling the sourcecode that was released by samsung to create a flashable working version of the manufacturer Android version that is currently running in our phones?
If that is possible, and we do have the source code from samsung, I don't see why it would be impossible to get at least a vanilla AOSP 2.1-update1 running on our galaxies.
The encrypted (or closed source drivers) can be linked as binaries to the new AOSP build running on top of Samsung's kernel (which we do have the source code to).
Side question, anybody knows how to flash the phone once you got all source code by samsung compiled ? I know we end up with a zImage, possibly a system.img.. can you create Odin files with these easily ? any thoughts?
miker71 said:
Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
The only reason I ditched the N1 is because Google have said there would be no N2 so I figured I find another phone.
Now I realise how bad fragmentation is, the iPhone really doesn't look so bad again ... (previous to the N1, I was on a iPhone 3G)
It's a pity vendors can't be mandated to supply optional vanilla ROMs - I know Samsung have released a bunch of source code, maybe that's a start.
I guess I'll give it six months. I'm an end-user who wants an easy life, but appreciates the potential and integration with google services that Android provides - moreso in its vanilla form.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same here. previous n1 user, got sgs just after google announced no n2 wil be available.
just took some actions to make things smoother for me :
1. launcher pro
2. dialer one
3. handcent sms
i used them all on n1 and now i do on sgs. its all good again . still, untill froyo hits us i think i will still miss n1's speed. also, i think after froyo hits us, we will get some more roms and goodies for our phones.
what exactly is a vendor tree? and how would it be able to get around the driver issue which is apparant to the SGS?
Some info on the .rfs files that samsung uses:
http://movitool.ntd.homelinux.org/trac/movitool/wiki/RFS
Merging into AOSP
It seems like good idea to have the scripts merged into AOSP tree that support building stock ROMS for samsung galaxy s, with binary-only files being downloaded directly from the device (if I'm not mistaken, this is how one can build froyo for N1 from source now).
From someone else experience: would the patches that add vendor-specific support for SGS be accepted into AOSP tree? Are there known blockers for this?
Hmm.. rom development is quite sluggish due to the firmwares that are being released!
But i really don't care! the original rom is fine with WJG5!
I just use Launcher Pro and widgets to make it better! Speed is ok!
bratfink said:
I was aware that a few days ago paul obrien was having a conversation to cyanogen about creating a vendor tree for the sgs which would enable us to use cyanogen mod. If someone can confirm this with paul this would be very good news for us sgs owners.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.
miker71 said:
Right now I'd settle for a vanilla Froyo (my last phone was the N1).
The SGS has potential, but the stock ROM is so infested with Samsung customisations (eg non- AOSP dialer, contacts, music, etc etc), why have they re-invented the wheel?? Before this phone I didn't think fragmentation existed, only "legacy". Now I know exactly what fragmentation is, and it's ugly, annoying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This isn't fragmentation though, this is exactly what Google wanted Android to be - a base for phone manufacturers to lay their own tweaks on top of. HTC, Motorola, Samsung etc don't just want to be differentiated by how their handset looks, they want to put their own stuff on there too. Previously each had their own OS (Symbian, UIQ etc.) that took years of development time and was very slow moving. Google provided Android as a quick route to market for a phone, the manufacturers didn't really have to worry too much about the OS and then get lots of apps for free.
The thing is, the vanilla apps are a bit.. basic. The standard music player is fine, it works and does what it says on the tin. The standard contacts is fine again etc. Makers can ship a ROM based on vanilla Android and it would be good to go, but if they can improve upon the apps and brand it slightly more then all well and good.
But it's not fragmentation. Android is a base. A starting point. It's not meant to look exactly the same on every device, but it's meant to work exactly the same as much as possible. These manufacturers get a stable, standard, capable phone OS for free, which to them is awesome. It saves them so much time and is ultimately why eventually there will be nothing but Android on devices. It's the Mac vs PC all over again - cool but closed and restricted vs ubiquitous free-for-all.
psychoace said:
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the right people get onto it it's only a matter of time. The G1 camera drivers were reverse engineered for Eclair CM ROMs after HTC gave the community sod-all.
dirk1978 said:
If the right people get onto it it's only a matter of time. The G1 camera drivers were reverse engineered for Eclair CM ROMs after HTC gave the community sod-all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't they have the source for 1.6's camera drivers? At least then they had a base to start from. That is not true with Samsungs drivers.
A little bit OT but due to the fact that in this thread are some EX-Nexus users: Would you recommend switching to the SGS ?
dirk1978 said:
it's meant to work exactly the same as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's when it doesn't work, it's very very annoying. How long do we have to wait for the Samsung music player to enable scrobbling? Sure I can use a different app from the Market - meaning Samsung wasted effort on their own Music app, why didn't they build on the AOSP version which does support scrobbling and iSyncr, etc because they use standard API or whatever so these other programs can read the state or whatever they need to do.
Same with dialer and contacts - on Launcher Pro, pressing the default Contacts icon - won't get you anything except maybe a FC :-(
The AOSP Desk Clock - where is that? If I install a clock from Market then I have two different Alarm daemons which is a waste of everyone's time when the default Clock in AOSP Eclair is fine and - more importantly - compatible with stuff and API calls.
Then all the other stuff that may or may not be Samsung stuff - the DRM, the Device Management, the Samsung Account - given the option I just don't want that stuff.
I'm intending to flash JG5 (from factory shipped JF3) which may increase performance but presume won't make these other problems go away.
I'm really happy with the hardware - but currently I am dissatisfied with the software and "Samsung knows best". For me, personally, Google knows best (and I bet they have data on me to prove it!), so I really want to see Froyo AOSP version for the Galaxy. That day may come, or it may not ...
I know I know, "can't please all of the people all of the time"
PAO1908 said:
A little bit OT but due to the fact that in this thread are some EX-Nexus users: Would you recommend switching to the SGS ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right now the question for me would be "do I recommend switching from Samsung OS from Froyo" - my answer would be no, unless:
1. better multitouch is important to you (better for gaming, no axis mess-up)
2. 4" screen is important (I do really like the Samsung screen)
3. Better built-in audio quality is important (the Galaxy is noticeably louder than the N1 and I think it may have a better A/D sampler too)
So fully recommend switching for hardware, UNLESS you can't live without Froyo.
I can live with the SGS shortcomings. Well, for a few months anyway ... and even if AOSP never comes there are alternatives in the Market but does mean you have to ignore the Samsung stock apps depending what you want to do (which means added complexity to your life, which I don't always have time to deal with!)
psychoace said:
This still doesn't get around the fact that the drivers are locked down and are near impossible to implement into outside roms that aren't Samsung based. Talking isn't doing anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have any proof that the drivers are actually locked down in any way?
I can see the source of all the modules provided by samsung, just 3 of them (pvrsrvkm, s3cbc and s3clcd) are just precompiled, and if you check the info they are GPL.
Am I missing something?
@miker71
Thanks a lot !
With the release of the S-PEN SDK, does that mean AOSP based roms will become a reality? I'm sure any AOSP based roms may not work properly for the GNote because of the S-PEN, so does the SDK solve this?
Much more interesting is the question, if the S-Pen or generally the pen implementation Samsung has gone for is compatible with the Ice Cream Sandwich implementation and therefore future proof or if they went their completely own way and ICS wont bring anything good to the Note except equipped with Sammys proprietary tools...
Jeez, is this really one single huge sentence? I'm afraid it is.
Sent from my GT-N7000
I was really wondering the same thing, but in a different way.
The current Touchwiz builds all have issues with playing music in A2DP stereo.
This is caused by low bitpool settings, which are compiled into their proprietary bluetooth stack.
This could all be fixed by using an AOSP-based kernel (and thus bluetooth stack).
I'll be honest, I would prefer vanilla ICS, but I would be happy to skin Touchwiz ICS, provided they at least fixed the BT issue.
Another way of asking a similar question is if cyanogenmod plans on integrating the S-pen into CM9 for the Gnote.
The current answer seems- maybe after Touchwiz ICS is released... maybe
The currently existing very early build of CM9 seems to be supporting the pen. Of course no proprietary Samsung software like S-Memo and such is integrated, but the hardware works, I once read in the thread. I didn't follow the thread though and I believe it's rather quickly growing
schaggo said:
The currently existing very early build of CM9 seems to be supporting the pen. Of course no proprietary Samsung software like S-Memo and such is integrated, but the hardware works, I once read in the thread. I didn't follow the thread though and I believe it's rather quickly growing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you tried it personally? I seem to remember it being stated that CM9 would categorically not support it, however ICS natively supports pen input.
I also heard that if it did support, would not be pressure-sensitive without the Spen SDK
No I didnt try it personally but I still strongly believe an overview was given and the S-Pen functionality was mentioned working.
I'll check the thread out though once I find time to do so, I'm quite interested to know, really.
#Tapatalk #Galaxy Note
Hello guys,
I am a new owner of the GT-P7320 Galaxy Tab 8.9 LTE and I'm a bit confused about the naming and available roms.
First off, what's the difference between 7300/7310 and 7320? All the guides in this section, including the "one-stop ultimate guide" (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1406137) are written with 7300 and 7310 in mind. Is there anything I should be aware of, or I can simply follow the guide with my device as well?
Also, I noticed there are separate roms for 7320 in the development forums, yet I managed to find only 1 thread - the OTA ICS one (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1901664). Why is that? Did I miss something, or there are no roms available for the device yet?
Is there a point in flashing the OTA ICS 4.0.4 right now? Is it AOSP, or has got the TouchWiz interface? How stable is it? I was really looking forward to ICS just for the sole purpose of being able to use Chrome.
I tried using search and did some research on the forums, also I am quite experienced with rooting and flashing other android devices - but the 7320 got me really confused out there.
Thanks in advance!
The most important difference is that 7320 uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon architecture - to power the LTE chip - while 7300 and 7310 feature a less efficient NVidia Tegra. The LTE is also the least popular amongst the 8.9 Tabs. But we've got root, we know how to deal with OTA updates that Samsung doesn't release to public, and we have Arlicc's ROM that is basically stock Touchwiz ICS with some tweaks.
ICS runs great on this Tab and really there's no reason to stick with the Honeycomb.
Yes, actually, the Arlicc's ROM got released after I made the thread I'm using it right now, very satisfied so far - you are right, ICS runs great and smooth. In fact, it seems faster than 3.2!
Thank you very much for your kind answer! There's one thing I still don't understand though - I have always thought that Qualcomm Snapdragon is a CPU and Tegra is a video card/module - how come Snapdragon in 7320 is more efficent than Tegra in 7300? Aren't 7300/7310 using Snapdragon as well?
Both are "system on chips", basically a CPU, GPU and radio stuffed into a single chip. The 7320 CPU is a 1.5 GHz (compared to 1 GHz on 7300/7310) dual-core. Apparenty a Tegra 2 device wouldn't be able to handle an LTE radio.
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.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b3IbkOrkYtE
The official Galaxy Note 5 Nougat firmware has been released on SamMobile. Since Nougat is the most complete Android version in existence while also improving battery life marginally, I think it would be amazing if someone could port the Galaxy Note 5 ROM for the Galaxy Note 4 International Exynos variant (N910C).
Lol
Or the 910V!
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
To port a certain firmware the device has to be on the same software level or the hardware should be the same eg: The note 7 "Grace UX" came out with marshmallow so devs were able to port it to the note 4. The next scenario is where the hardware is of the same. The note 5 has a 7420 exonys chip set while the note 4 has the 5433 chip set. So this is clearly impossible. Our best bet is the Samsung Tab s2 which has a exonys 5433 chipset and is due to receive nougat somewhere by the end of may
vishudha98 said:
To port a certain firmware the device has to be on the same software level or the hardware should be the same eg: The note 7 "Grace UX" came out with marshmallow so devs were able to port it to the note 4. The next scenario is where the hardware is of the same. The note 5 has a 7420 exonys chip set while the note 4 has the 5433 chip set. So this is clearly impossible. Our best bet is the Samsung Tab s2 which has a exonys 5433 chipset and is due to receive nougat somewhere by the end of may
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One thing that confuses me, is that devices like the Galaxy S4 and even the Galaxy S4 mini, have completely stable roms running Nougat, even though Samsung stopped updating those after Lollipop. I see AICP, ResurrectionRemix and all these other projects that create this amazingly rock stable rom for the devices, yet for the Exynos variant of the Galaxy Note 4, there doesn't seem to be any movement. :crying:
Xephyrex said:
One thing that confuses me, is that devices like the Galaxy S4 and even the Galaxy S4 mini, have completely stable roms running Nougat, even though Samsung stopped updating those after Lollipop. I see AICP, ResurrectionRemix and all these other projects that create this amazingly rock stable rom for the devices, yet for the Exynos variant of the Galaxy Note 4, there doesn't seem to be any movement. :crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used to own a samsung s4 myself before i switched to the note 4 and it was the i9505 (snapdragon variant). Android Open Source (AOSP) roms are possible only for snapdragon devices because the soc's are open source and exonys as we know is manufactured by samsung and samsung does not release the sources thats why AOSP roms are not easy to port to exonys variants. I regret switching phones because the s4 has so many stable aosp roms while the exonys variant's get nothing. Hope i answered your question
vishudha98 said:
I used to own a samsung s4 myself before i switched to the note 4 and it was the i9505 (snapdragon variant). Android Open Source (AOSP) roms are possible only for snapdragon devices because the soc's are open source and exonys as we know is manufactured by samsung and samsung does not release the sources thats why AOSP roms are not easy to port to exonys variants. I regret switching phones because the s4 has so many stable aosp roms while the exonys variant's get nothing. Hope i answered your question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh yes, I had a feeling it had something to with the chipsets. It's a shame, I paid full price recently to buy the Exynos variant specifically for modding. I chose Exynos over the Snapdragon variant because the Exynos chip is 64bit compared to the Snapdragon which is 32bit, so it seemed like a better choice given that the Android ecosystem is headed towards 64bit ever since Lollipop and so I would be future-proofing my device. Unfortunately now it seems Exynos is a lot more difficult to make roms for I guess it's almost like comparing the PS3 with the Xbox 360: PS3 has more power than the 360, but the PS3's CBE chip is so much more difficult to make games for. Here's hoping for a long and fruitful development life for the Exynos Galaxy Note 4 :fingers-crossed:
Xephyrex said:
Ahh yes, I had a feeling it had something to with the chipsets. It's a shame, I paid full price recently to buy the Exynos variant specifically for modding. I chose Exynos over the Snapdragon variant because the Exynos chip is 64bit compared to the Snapdragon which is 32bit, so it seemed like a better choice given that the Android ecosystem is headed towards 64bit ever since Lollipop and so I would be future-proofing my device. Unfortunately now it seems Exynos is a lot more difficult to make roms for I guess it's almost like comparing the PS3 with the Xbox 360: PS3 has more power than the 360, but the PS3's CBE chip is so much more difficult to make games for. Here's hoping for a long and fruitful development life for the Exynos Galaxy Note 4 :fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also samsung doesnt advertise their exonys devices as 64 bit and marshmallow for the device is also a 32 bit os. In short samsung doesnt utilize the full capacity of the note 4's 64 bit chipset. But the advantage is that since the device and the chipset is made by the same company the phone is more fluid and responsive than its snapdragon counterpart. Something similar to googles pixel, software and hardware made by same company
vishudha98 said:
Also samsung doesnt advertise their exonys devices as 64 bit and marshmallow for the device is also a 32 bit os. In short samsung doesnt utilize the full capacity of the note 4's 64 bit chipset. But the advantage is that since the device and the chipset is made by the same company the phone is more fluid and responsive than its snapdragon counterpart. Something similar to googles pixel, software and hardware made by same company
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity, which rom have you found to be the best and most stable for the Exynos variant? Or are you using stock?
Xephyrex said:
Out of curiosity, which rom have you found to be the best and most stable for the Exynos variant? Or are you using stock?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I regularly switch between stock and custom roms. The best ux based roms are Pirobot v6, Doola v12 and DN7 v0.1
If youre looking for something close to stock erobot v19 would be the best
vishudha98 said:
I regularly switch between stock and custom roms. The best ux based roms are Pirobot v6, Doola v12 and DN7 v0.1
If youre looking for something close to stock erobot v19 would be the best
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, v19 seems to be the best. I've found that battery life is abysmal when on UX roms :/ plus, there are far too many bugs from DN7 that I tried. I stuck with erobot 19 and am using Samsung's GoodLock and it works amazingly well. To be honest, I'm not bothered about the GraceUX anymore; Samsung's GoodLock literally does it all while looking sleek. So I've found erobot + GoodLock is the best combo so far! Only downside, fingerprint lock screen doesn't seem to be functional, but other than that, everything else is golden. I was tempted to head back to stock rom but it seems that Samsung cloud doesn't allow the Galaxy Note 4 on stock rom to backup and restore music and other files from Samsung Cloud. The only way I've found Samsung Cloud's backup/restore to fully work is by using erobot and hence why I've stayed away from stock.
vishudha98 said:
I regularly switch between stock and custom roms. The best ux based roms are Pirobot v6, Doola v12 and DN7 v0.1
If youre looking for something close to stock erobot v19 would be the best
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is something which I'd hoped you could help me with, I'm on erobot 19 as you know, for some reason the multiwindow tray keeps popping up randomly. It's the tray that pops up when you hold the back key but it seems to pop up randomly even when I'm not holding down the back key. Do you have any ideas how to stop that from happening without completely disabling multiwindow feature?
Xephyrex said:
There is something which I'd hoped you could help me with, I'm on erobot 19 as you know, for some reason the multiwindow tray keeps popping up randomly. It's the tray that pops up when you hold the back key but it seems to pop up randomly even when I'm not holding down the back key. Do you have any ideas how to stop that from happening without completely disabling multiwindow feature?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I havent run into this issue when i was on erobot but that was v18 i havent tried v19 yet. sorry
vishudha98 said:
I havent run into this issue when i was on erobot but that was v18 i havent tried v19 yet. sorry
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've noticed that whenever I receive notifications on my device and I am using it at the time, I would hear the notification sound (for example, received a new email) and then the multi-window tray opens up. Strange indeed.
Xephyrex said:
I've noticed that whenever I receive notifications on my device and I am using it at the time, I would hear the notification sound (for example, received a new email) and then the multi-window tray opens up. Strange indeed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats strange indeed. Also thats the old multi window isnt it? The new one is accessed through the app switcher
vishudha98 said:
Thats strange indeed. Also thats the old multi window isnt it? The new one is accessed through the app switcher
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think it is the old one, i mean i can see the split screen option above the app card when in recents but then you also have the option to open the app tray which has a bunch of apps in it that you can open in pop-up view.
I would take a screenshot of it but the side multiwindow tray disappears when i try to.
Good lock is causing the popup. All versions after .10
raul6 said:
Good lock is causing the popup. All versions after .10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh right, which version of GoodLock would you recommend then?
24.0.10 from apkmirror.com