Related
So where is the free HTC navigation ? I thought it was part of sense .. can we cook it and install separately .I am on stock ics ... Att vivid.
raydm said:
So where is the free HTC navigation ? I thought it was part of sense .. can we cook it and install separately .I am on stock ics ... Att vivid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have it on my Telstra one...
Just use Google Navigation. The ICS implementation is really nice.
Sent from my HTC Velocity 4G using XDA Premium App
HTC Navigation is in the Locations app. Available for purchase by individual country for 9.99USD/30 days, 39.99USD/12months, 49.99/Unlimited
I love Google Navigation. Have never used HTC Navigation for the above reason
homeslice976 said:
HTC Navigation is in the Locations app. Available for purchase by individual country for 9.99USD/30 days, 39.99USD/12months, 49.99/Unlimited
I love Google Navigation. Have never used HTC Navigation for the above reason
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here its offers the same as the at&t navigator with the exception of the traffic camera notification.
And where is the location app ? There is att navigator which is different .. I guess att want some more cash from selling there offer.
Can some one extract HTC navigation from sensation ics and post ...
raydm said:
And where is the location app ? There is att navigator which is different .. I guess att want some more cash from selling there offer.
Can some one extract HTC navigation from sensation ics and post ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On AT&T Vivids, the AT&T Navigator app probably replaced anything HTC might have added. I could not find an HTC branded navigation program on my Vivid. AT&T Navigator (and others based on the same system) has always been a fee-based program. My old HD2 had a similar program based on Navteq data. The fees would make sense only if you did a lot of traveling in unfamiliar areas.
Google Navigation (which shows up as a separate app, but is really part of Google Maps) works well as long as you have a data connection. (Actually you can pre-cache selected 10-mile wide areas for use without a data connection.)
Personally, I prefer Co-Pilot. I paid a flat, one-time fee of $30 (U.S.) and downloaded all the maps I need to my SD card. I can get updates as needed. And no data connection is required.
When I select a contact from people and then select view location, an entirely different navigation program starts up. It is the locations program. It maps, but does not navigate as well as google maps unless you buy the nav part.
Sent from mobile phone.
any rogers users collaborate on this. can we get htc location extracted from rogers version.
raydm said:
any rogers users collaborate on this. can we get htc location extracted from rogers version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't have the locations app at all? I'm on WCX ATT Stock build and I have it. HTC Navigation is built into it. 30 day free trial, then prices as quoted above
Here's the HtcLaputa.apk and HtcLaputaInstaller.apk. Don't know if anything else is required.
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?n6i24rsqirvosld
vinceweis said:
When I select a contact from people and then select view location, an entirely different navigation program starts up. It is the locations program. It maps, but does not navigate as well as google maps unless you buy the nav part.
Sent from mobile phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On my AT&T Vivid, if I select a contact with an address, and tap on view address, I get a dialog asking me to choose between AT&T Navigator or Google Maps. I guess it all depends on what applicaitons HTC and/or the carrier installed the the various phones. I have a stock Vivid with ICS.
brucegil said:
On my AT&T Vivid, if I select a contact with an address, and tap on view address, I get a dialog asking me to choose between AT&T Navigator or Google Maps. I guess it all depends on what applicaitons HTC and/or the carrier installed the the various phones. I have a stock Vivid with ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's nice that it let's you choose. If I select an Address from within a contact in People, it automatically launches Locations (and locations does not have any Defaults set) which is linked to the HTC Paid Navigation. However, if I click the picture of the contact in People (instead of actually opening the contact), it gives me a Map option in the popup, which opens Google Maps and Free Google Navigation
I have in settings -> app associations at map address and physical address set on Maps (which is Google Maps)
Sent from my HTC Vivid via Tapatalk
slimslim said:
I have in settings -> app associations at map address and physical address set on Maps (which is Google Maps)
Sent from my HTC Vivid via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Map address was set to footprints. Changed this to Maps and rebooted..now addresses within the contact try to open in maps...but it tells me there are no matched results for any of my addresses and asks me if I want to launch locations anyway. Must not like the way I have my addresses formatted or something. Thanks though...never even considered footprints
Ok, so I was really excited when Google discussed at I/O the ability to save map data for certain areas to be able to access it with our Nexus7's without a data connection. Obviously on a tablet with no 3G/4G/LTE/etc. connectivity, this is a requirement to be able to use it as a GPS device.
When I got mine, I saved my entire home region. It seems to cap out around 85MB in size, so you can't just save the entire country, which is fine. I also noticed that the amount of space required seems to be tied to the size of the map you make, and has nothing to do with the amount of streets, cities, etc. (aka data) for that location (ie: New York City takes up the same amount of space as Nowheresville, MT). This was a little confusing, but OK.
Anyway, here is my issue. The other day, I took my Nexus7 for a road trip, and tried to use the Navigation app. It was able to show me where I was in real time, and give somewhat-detailed street information which was nice. However, it doesn't actually know how to GET anywhere. In other words, if you try to give it a destination, it fails, requiring Internet access. I tried addresses, cities, business names (who are actually on the map) as well as just clicking somewhere and asking it to provide a route. Nothing.
So I ask this: what good is offline map storage if you can't actually DO anything with it?
Don't get me wrong, I understand that this is a new feature and might not be fully developed. But based on the Google I/O presentation, they made it out to be much more functional than it is. Something along the lines of "Going to a different city? Just preload your Nexus7 with the map for the area and you're good to go!". Sure, if all you want is a static map and want to try and figure out directions yourself, I guess that will work. But it certainly doesn't provide anywhere near the functionality required for an offline GPS device.
Unless of course I'm missing something - but I doubt it.
I agree and I don't think you're missing something. For the size of the data it downloads for a given area, I believe it has all the address so I why can't one do a search of somewhere?
Might have something to do with apple taking aim at local search functions with their lawsuits? Finding that information would probably require accessing the function in question.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
nooomoto said:
Might have something to do with apple taking aim at local search functions with their lawsuits? Finding that information would probably require accessing the function in question.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Possibly, but I doubt it. AFAIK, the "local search" issue was with Samsung allowing users to run a search query which would also perform the search on local apps, files, etc. It had nothing to do with map searching, which would fall under a completely different scope. And the app supports it, but just seems to require Internet to make it work.
Also, while Samsung seemingly took it out of one/some of their devices with an OTA update, they later said this was an accident, and have pushed a fix out to put it back.
I given up with Offline Maps, really it just the same as having a paper map that only covers a limited area, instead I've been using NavFree, does navigation, address search, points of interest all without a data connection.
The Apple/Samsung lawsuit is 100% unrelated to offline search in maps. Google it, do some reading, and you'll see what I mean. I have GPS Copilot installed for any offline needs I may have.
Yeah dude google maps offline is a joke. You'll need to
1) start your destination somewhere you are connected to wifi
2) wait for google maps offline to not suck so bad
3) use a different app
Or just root your phone and tether...that's what I've been doing for years.
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA Premium HD app
nooomoto said:
Or just root your phone and tether...that's what I've been doing for years.
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't solve the problem, it's simply a work around.
Sure, if you have wifi or tethering you can get online and get live maps/route data. But that doesn't negate the fact that Google Maps Offline is seriously flawed. It should work without needing to be online, otherwise what's the point of saving offline map data in the first place.
phonic said:
That doesn't solve the problem, it's simply a work around.
Sure, if you have wifi or tethering you can get online and get live maps/route data. But that doesn't negate the fact that Google Maps Offline is seriously flawed. It should work without needing to be online, otherwise what's the point of saving offline map data in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's much better than not having the map at all. If you have a GPS (like the Nexus 7 does), you still see yourself on the map where you are. The only thing missing is the blue line to your destination. It's limited, sure, but it's a lot better than not having a map at all to see your GPS location on.
+1 for NavFree though. If you need navigation (like in cities you aren't familiar with), this is a lifesaver, even if it eats battery rapidly and is very slow (at least on my Galaxy S).
I'm sure Google can/will release offline navigation in time (possibly along with entire country map downloads), but probably not until Apple pushes them to by releasing their own offline navigation.
jabsys said:
I given up with Offline Maps, really it just the same as having a paper map that only covers a limited area, instead I've been using NavFree, does navigation, address search, points of interest all without a data connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used the offline maps with directions when i started out on a data connection and then immediately turned it off. I started the n7 navigation with it tethered to my phone, once navigation has established its route, I disconnect my data and the directions continue to work.
This worked for me. It may not work for you, I do apologize if I waste your time.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
I use offline maps quite a bit.
Navigation is usually useless for most of the back country roads I'm on. Having a map and GPS showing me where I am in relation to where I need to be (pre-set waypoints) is awesome and is better than nothing.
Another app I use often is Maverick with pre-cached satellite maps. I'd dump Maverick if Google Maps had offline satellite and topo maps.
jabsys said:
I given up with Offline Maps, really it just the same as having a paper map that only covers a limited area, instead I've been using NavFree, does navigation, address search, points of interest all without a data connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for showing me this app! That's perfect, and just what I'm looking for. Looks like it will work amazingly!
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Premium HD app
I wish apps could use the cached data from Maps, but so far each app I've tried appears to download it and cache it directly. No idea if it's even possible to to, but it'd be nice if all apps could access the cache and use it.
As for the OP, this has been discussed since Maps first released.... It does not have the engine or routing data to do offline navigation. Maybe it will in the future, but it does not today.
try Co-pilot GPS from the market. It's free, and it downloads maps and stores them on the phone. If you have any svox classic voices purchased you will get the more advanced street names as part of the turn by turn verbal directions. I haven't tried this version yet, but it looks great and for free you have nothing to lose.
nooomoto said:
Or just root your phone and tether...that's what I've been doing for years.
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tether to what? I already pay $70 a month for internet at home I am sure as hell not gonna pay for more data
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
IMO, for a FREE navigation app, I think you get a little more than you paid for...
The Turn-by-Turn directions require a data connection initially. But once it has downloaded the directions, you can use it offline and still get the voice directions - I tested it out on Saturday. You want to leave it connected a few minutes so it can cache all the map tiles along the route. If you don't let it finish caching the route, there will be places where you can see the route and get voice nagivation, but the streets won't show up.
If you deviate from the route, however, you will lose any navigation until you get back on the suggested route. You can see your route on the map, but there won't be any streets showing up at your location - even if you have chached the entire area in maps. If you zoom out you can see the suggested route. The voice nagivation will try to get you to turn around and go back since it can't recalculate the route. It needs more than just a map to calculate the route. It doesn't read a map the way you or I would to get directions...:silly:
I had maps and navigation running at the same time, and when I left the suggested route I switched over to maps (leaving navigation running in the background) and could see the streets I was on. A bit crude but it worked...
Once in range of the suggested route, the voice navigation will pick back up again and continue from there, and the streets will show up again.
I really hope Google eventually allows client side navigation, instead of server side requiring a data plan or wifi.
I've used Google Navigation on my tablet by calculating a route prior to disconnect from wifi, and their Navigation is hands down the best available for Android.
I've tried other Navigation apps, and they're super slow compared to Google, especially when it comes to re-routing or telling when you turned. Google almost re-routes you instantly when you go off route, other apps sometimes take a full minute before they set another route. Plus, Goole's street naming is fantastic for audible directions.
Offline maps is something, but off line route planning will be the ultimate offering.
I don't see how this could be too difficult to enable. Sure, maybe there are patent issues to work out (possible, but unlikely). But this functionality is already present in cheap GPS devices. The maps themselves take up a lot of space (a couple gigs on average for the entire US on a dedicated GPS unit), but if we download an 85MB region map, all the streets/addresses should already be built in. So it comes down to getting the routing engine to work offline. I'm not sure how big or complex this is, but IMHO it should be a simple addition.
And yes, it's "free" so we are getting what we pay for, but still.
As I mentioned earlier, my biggest disappointment was that Google made it out to be a fully comprehensive update to Google Maps, when it really isn't.
phonic said:
I don't see how this could be too difficult to enable. Sure, maybe there are patent issues to work out (possible, but unlikely). But this functionality is already present in cheap GPS devices. The maps themselves take up a lot of space (a couple gigs on average for the entire US on a dedicated GPS unit), but if we download an 85MB region map, all the streets/addresses should already be built in. So it comes down to getting the routing engine to work offline. I'm not sure how big or complex this is, but IMHO it should be a simple addition.
And yes, it's "free" so we are getting what we pay for, but still.
As I mentioned earlier, my biggest disappointment was that Google made it out to be a fully comprehensive update to Google Maps, when it really isn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would love to know Google's reasoning behind server side routing only. I've searched around, but can't find a definitive answer. I always figured they stay clear from allowing off-line routing because you'll lose out on real-time traffic condition, weather, accident updates, etc.
im a happy nexus 7 owner but im wondering how i can protect my nexus private data or even FB or TW from other people, in my phone i use avast so i can "delete" all data by sms, but i cant do this on my nexus, i was thinking use "pattern" or pin unlock screen, but its annoying doing this on every time i want unlock my screen, i was thinking on apps that put password on selected apps, but again maybe this could be annoying, and maybe someone with a little skill can use ADB or uninstall TB and re install and delete "data" from the app who its protecting (im rooted) so im wondering its other way to protect my nexus 7? i guess this are the best but im wondering if its other way that i didint know.
Thanks
Cerberus app
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
ateebtk said:
Cerberus app
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 for Cerberus.
I use it on my nexus 7 and my att Samsung galaxy s ii. It can remotely wipe your device, lock it, track it via GPS even if you don't have GPS on, set off alarms, take pictures and video from the camera, and many other things. It is 110% worth it. I recommend it highly.
patriot720 said:
+1 for Cerberus.
I use it on my nexus 7 and my att Samsung galaxy s ii. It can remotely wipe your device, lock it, track it via GPS even if you don't have GPS on, set off alarms, take pictures and video from the camera, and many other things. It is 110% worth it. I recommend it highly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any noticeable effects on performance and battery life?
Lookout App.
Cerberus is a life saver! When both my Galaxy Nexus and my wallet were stolen in a restaurant I could track my mobile using a friend's phone within 2 mins after noticing the theft. I directed the police to the shop based on Cerberus' tracking and eventually got both my mobile and my wallet back within 15 mins after the call.
The issue with tracking a tablet without 3G is that you will only see it once it's logged into a wireless network rather than on the go. You'd also need to activate a pin which could be deactivated at home by an app like Tasker.
I suggest you also use Avast to scan for malware and as second protection which could survive a factory reset but not a new rom.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Yeah I'm testing thanks I will check seems kind of better than avast, not sure if this app will survive to factory reset, custom recovery should have password or something xD the bad it's nexus 7 doesn't had 3g u.u oh well thanks all
Enviado desde mi HTC One X
zen kun said:
i was thinking use "pattern" or pin unlock screen, but its annoying doing this on every time i want unlock my screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Protection is sometimes not convenient, but if you don't have a code lock your device is wide open to whom ever picks it up.
Pattern or Pin Lock
When I am out, I use a pattern lock on all devices. If I am home for the weekend, I turn it off however it is turned back on before I leave the house.
Cerberus
I use this on my Nexus and it works good. You do need to have a WiFi connection which limits it greatly since I never allow my device to connect to a public WiFi... but with the lock out, 5 tries and the device locks.
Backups
While the data is fairly secure, losing the data and even perhaps more important the time and effort setting up the device in the first place, means that using a good backup and having that available OFF the device so that if it is lost/stolen/destroyed, I can simply re-root and then restore and have it back to where I was when the backup was made. I do full backups every Sun.. and other occasionally when I make big changes.
Two Factor Authentication
When Possible, use 2-Factor authentication. If you not using it, you should look into it.
Check out the app Android Lost on the play store.
It securely links with your gmail account and does not do any polling to servers so it saves your battery.
When you lose your phone it allows you to do many many things such as activate an alarm, track using gps or wifi, take a picture with the front or rear camera, wipe the phone or lock it and many more features. All remotely.
Best part is its free and has a minimal footprint on device.
Check it out!
Run L1ke H3LL said:
Check out the app Android Lost on the play store.
It securely links with your gmail account and does not do any polling to servers so it saves your battery.
When you lose your phone it allows you to do many many things such as activate an alarm, track using gps or wifi, take a picture with the front or rear camera, wipe the phone or lock it and many more features. All remotely.
Best part is its free and has a minimal footprint on device.
Check it out!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus 7 is not a phone, so it doesn't by default it doesn't have SMS, it by itself has no 3G/4G communications. The only way you can talk to it is via WiFi.
I use Android Lost on all my phones... but since my phone uses the same same gmail account, it can't control the Nexus, hence the use of Cerberus.
is cerberus better than where's my droid?
krelvinaz said:
The Nexus 7 is not a phone, so it doesn't by default it doesn't have SMS, it by itself has no 3G/4G communications. The only way you can talk to it is via WiFi.
I use Android Lost on all my phones... but since my phone uses the same same gmail account, it can't control the Nexus, hence the use of Cerberus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use my Nexus tethered to my phone so it uses WiFi. I suppose if I lost it would still connect to the WiFi networks in my area and I could locate it by those methods. My cable company provides public WiFi which is ubiquitous so 90% of the time if I'm not tethered I have data.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
hoponpop said:
is cerberus better than where's my droid?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much better.
---------- Post added at 12:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 AM ----------
nyijedi said:
Any noticeable effects on performance and battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None at all.
If u really want to protect ur data, I suggest don't root the device and encrypt the entire tablet. Then set up a PIN to unlock. Security often means you have to give up some convenience at times but the reward is satisfying.
Also like some one already suggested use 2-factor auth for FB and make sure u deprovision the tablet account when u find it lost or stolen.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
I use seek droid for my phones, but purchased cerberus with my gift moolah and am happy with its performance and have also installed it on my Acer a500. The Developer is active with the community and has beta releases that fix some of the JB bugs.
So how secure is the Cerberus site? What's the dev's credentials in IT security? Is he just some dude with an app?
In signing up for this, you're putting the ability to remote-wipe/track/spy your online life into some dude's hands. You're paying him 3 bucks and hope he can keep it secure. Can he? In mitigating one risk (device theft), you're incurring a new risk of having your device remote wiped, or being spied upon, if the site gets hacked. Good trade-off?
With a one-time fee of $3, I don't see that much incentive for the dev to continuously maintain security, assuming he even has the expertise. It's his hobby, not his livelihood.
From a cursory inspection of the Cerberus site and its support forum, I don't see the word "security" or "2-factor authentication" anywhere.
Ditto SeekDroid or any similar app.
e.mote said:
So how secure is the Cerberus site? What's the dev's credentials in IT security? Is he just some dude with an app?
In signing up for this, you're putting the ability to remote-wipe/track/spy your online life into some dude's hands. You're paying him 3 bucks and hope he can keep it secure. Can he? In mitigating one risk (device theft), you're incurring a new risk of having your device remote wiped, or being spied upon, if the site gets hacked. Good trade-off?
With a one-time fee of $3, I don't see that much incentive for the dev to continuously maintain security, assuming he even has the expertise. It's his hobby, not his livelihood.
From a cursory inspection of the Cerberus site and its support forum, I don't see the word "security" or "2-factor authentication" anywhere.
Ditto SeekDroid or any similar app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have to somewhat agree with the sentiment here.. that said, I'm presently using the Cerberus demo on my N7 and it appears quit good.... would prefer this to have been a mainstream vendor product ....
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Seek droid, and I think I only paid $.99
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
They have some really good reviews on their web site. And from very qualified sources,check it out. I just installed Cerberus and tested out great.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
>They have some really good reviews on their web site. And from very qualified sources,check it out. I just installed Cerberus and tested out great.
Yes, very qualified. Hahah.
Here's a "review" maybe you should read. It's by Cerberus itself (emphasis added). Welcome to spyware.
https://www.cerberusapp.com/privacy.php
THE INFORMATION LSDROID COLLECTS
REGISTRATION INFORMATION: You provide to LSDroid certain personally-identifiable information (such as device ID number, wireless operator / operator, your name, email address, etc.) when choosing to subscribe to the LSDroid Services.
LOCATION INFORMATION: To provide the LSDroid Services, we derive location information from your wireless operator, certain third-party service providers, or directly from the mobile device that you used to register with the LSDroid Services. This location tracking of your mobile device may occur even when the LSDroid Services mobile application is not actively open and running, but your location is being securely transmitted and logged in accordance with your privacy and opt-in settings.
COOKIES, PERSISTENT FILE INFORMATION: When you use the LSDroid Services, we may send one or more cookies (small text files containing a string of alphanumeric characters) to your computer. LSDroid may use both session cookies and persistent cookies. A session cookie disappears after you close your browser. A persistent cookie remains after you close your web browser and may be used by us during your subsequent visits to the LSDroid Web site. Persistent cookies set by the LSDroid Web site can be removed. Please review your web browser "Help" file to learn the proper way to modify your cookie settings.
LOG FILE INFORMATION: When you use the LSDroid Services, our servers automatically record certain information about your usage from your mobile device and web browser. These server securely logs may include information such as a mobile device identification number and device identifier, web requests, Internet Protocol ("IP") address, browser type, browser language, referring / exit pages and URLs, platform type, number of clicks, domain names, landing pages, pages viewed and the order of those pages, features used in the LSDroid mobile application, the amount of time spent on particular web pages, the dates and times of your requests, and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify your browser.
So when I first got the HTC One (on ATT) I was super pissed to find out Google Wallet or Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
I've wanted to keep my phone stock (or stock-ish) so the most invasive thing I've tried was TrickDroid. Still no dice.
Finally, I figured that the GE edition ROMs would stop this tomfoolery, nope... still blocked.
So my questions are:
1) Are there any (hacky) ways to get this apps working?
2) Via what methods are they being block?
3) If it is truly ATT being the jerks here, does anyone want to help me create a ****-storm about this?
I know carrier blocking apps is old but coming from Tmo, this is really, really pissing me off.
No matter what you do, Google wallet wont work properly, as the One doesnt have the required secure element to run it.
As for hangouts, they are working fine for me, not sure what might be happening there...
cowmixtoo said:
So when I first got the HTC One (on ATT) I was super pissed to find out Google Wallet or Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
I've wanted to keep my phone stock (or stock-ish) so the most invasive thing I've tried was TrickDroid. Still no dice.
Finally, I figured that the GE edition ROMs would stop this tomfoolery, nope... still blocked.
So my questions are:
1) Are there any (hacky) ways to get this apps working?
2) Via what methods are they being block?
3) If it is truly ATT being the jerks here, does anyone want to help me create a ****-storm about this?
I know carrier blocking apps is old but coming from Tmo, this is really, really pissing me off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TheBishopOfSoho said:
No matter what you do, Google wallet wont work properly, as the One doesnt have the required secure element to run it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Oh, and as for Hangout, my HTC One came with Google Talk, and after a normal Play Store update, it changed to "Hangout" (Rogers HTC One, not rooted).
cowmixtoo said:
Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know att announced that the av portion (video chat) will be enabled over the next few months. Starting with unlimited users and going down the line. I think it works for me now as I am on the unlimited data plan.
Also search there is a hack if rooted to allow this now. You have to modify a file.
As far as wallet. Att Verizon and t mobile have rejected wallet for there own proprietary system called Isis. Currently only available in salt lake city and Austin. www.paywithisis.com
It sucks because they have not expanded the system beyond those 2 cities in a long time.
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
WhatsAUsername said:
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wohah there. Unless you have a source that isn't blatent misinformation. Google wallet is not offically supported on the HTC One unless you are on the sprint network in the states. Source: http://support.google.com/wallet/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1347934
As the model in question is the AT&T version he is telling the truth. Getting it to work otherwise is a hack.
WhatsAUsername said:
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Oh, and as for Hangout, my HTC One came with Google Talk, and after a normal Play Store update, it changed to "Hangout" (Rogers HTC One, not rooted).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Blatant" misinformation? Hardly. Try googling it, only Sprint editions of the One support wallet, there are many and varied references to other One versions lacking the hardware to support Wallet in its current incarnation.
How's this?
One thing worth mentioning: The HTC One Google Play Edition doesn't come with Google Wallet -- and the app also isn't available for installation on the device via the Play Store. (Wallet is installed on the GS4 Play Edition.) A Google spokesperson tells me this is due to the One's hardware lacking an embedded secure element that Wallet requires in order to run.http://blogs.computerworld.com/android/22397/galaxy-s4-htc-one-google-play-editions
So there's a hardware deficiency on the GSM version?
Why even both putting NFC on the phone?
BarryH_GEG said:
How's this?
One thing worth mentioning: The HTC One Google Play Edition doesn't come with Google Wallet -- and the app also isn't available for installation on the device via the Play Store. (Wallet is installed on the GS4 Play Edition.) A Google spokesperson tells me this is due to the One's hardware lacking an embedded secure element that Wallet requires in order to run.http://blogs.computerworld.com/android/22397/galaxy-s4-htc-one-google-play-editions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cowmixtoo said:
So there's a hardware deficiency on the GSM version?
Why even both putting NFC on the phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NFC has other uses as well. You can share things easily between phones. Also some places have NFC payments without google wallet. In Canada Rogers and CIBC have teamed up and made NFC payments for the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Google Wallet is the biggest NFC payment network for a phone. For people coming from Wallet devices (like I had the GN and the N4 before) this is an insane let down.
I would have never bought the HTC Onc and moved to ATT if this lack of functionality was made clear.
bobruels44 said:
NFC has other uses as well. You can share things easily between phones. Also some places have NFC payments without google wallet. In Canada Rogers and CIBC have teamed up and made NFC payments for the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cowmixtoo said:
Google Wallet is the biggest NFC payment network for a phone. For people coming from Wallet devices (like I had the GN and the N4 before) this is an insane let down.
I would have never bought the HTC Onc and moved to ATT if this lack of functionality was made clear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All it took me to look up was a quick google search. And Google Wallet is only the biggest NFC payment system in the UnS. Everywhere else does not have that option. NFC does have other uses, limited yes, but other ones.
Carrier Issue
IMO, this is a carrier's issue or fault, not HTC's.
bobruels44 said:
the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dgtiii said:
IMO, this is a carrier's issue or fault, not HTC's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're both missing the point. The issue being discussed is a h/w issue where, for some reason, HTC's omitted the secure element in the NFC chip they use that Google Wallet (and any other payment systems) is dependent on. Carrier's block access to Google Wallet but if the phone's properly equipped h/w wise you can work around it. You can't work around the absence of a secure element. If you want to know what the secure element does do a Google search on "Google Wallet secure element."
BarryH_GEG said:
You're both missing the point. The issue being discussed is a h/w issue where, for some reason, HTC's omitted the secure element in the NFC chip they use that Google Wallet (and any other payment systems) is dependent on. Carrier's block access to Google Wallet but if the phone's properly equipped h/w wise you can work around it. You can't work around the absence of a secure element. If you want to know what the secure element does do a Google search on "Google Wallet secure element."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the s3 I was not talking about google wallet there. I was talking about the Canadian variant of the s3. Google wallet is not available up here on any device on any carrier. That's why I was mentioning that. I may be incorect about the hardware component on that variant however my point of there are alternatives in other outcries remains.
So, is the problem with NFC a physical hardware piece, or can it be fixed with software? "Lack of a secure element" is why Verizon blocked Google Wallet on the Verizon Galaxy Nexus but that still ended up working.
dsass600 said:
So, is the problem with NFC a physical hardware piece, or can it be fixed with software? "Lack of a secure element" is why Verizon blocked Google Wallet on the Verizon Galaxy Nexus but that still ended up working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys are confused. Here's what a secure element is and does...
If you're not familiar with how Wallet functions, it's a bit odd as an application goes. The Wallet app isn't the only "piece" necessary to get the Wallet service functioning, there are two other parts of the equation. One you're already familiar with: NFC (near-field communication). It's a simple, open wireless standard that transmits data over very short distances. In Wallet's case, it transmits payment data. But there's a third wheel in play that many people aren't aware of, and it's called a "secure element." Without getting too technical (eg, into things I don't at all understand), the secure element's job is to store encrypted credentials (your payment info) and tell the Wallet app "hey, these are the credentials you need to transmit to the payment terminal."
Only one card's credentials are stored on the element at a given time (obvious security reasons), which is why you need an internet connection if you want to switch your active card in Wallet. When you sign in to Wallet or change cards, the Wallet app calls up to the Google server, pulls down your credentials for a particular card, and then writes them to the secure element.
But one does not simply write to the secure element (... or walk into Mordor), it requires special permissions. Google Wallet is doing something few apps do - asking for direct, exclusive access to a secure piece of hardware in the phone. Not only that, once Google takes over the secure element, it wants total control. Because of the security concerns (and related technical difficulties) involved in sharing a secure element, Wallet and only Wallet is able to utilize the internal secure element on a Wallet-enabled device. That means Google is directly managing every layer of the process. http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...why-the-carrier-is-still-allowed-to-block-it/
People got Wallet working on the VZW GN by side-loading it; much like everyone else who's running Wallet even though it's not carrier or region supported for their particular device . VZW's beef is that they don't trust third parties to use security-enabled h/w that VZW can't control on VZW-sold devices. When VZW realized people were by-passing the process they, with Google's help, did the following...
So Google Wallet has never officially been available for Verizon, on any smartphone. However for months now users have been able to side-load Google’s awesome Wallet app for mobile NFC payments using the web store, or installing a custom ROM. Today however it appears that Google’s pulled the backend plug. http://androidcommunity.com/google-wallet-gets-pulled-from-verizon-galaxy-nexus-20120914/
If the VZW GN didn't have a secure element Wallet would have never worked. The only two phones I've heard about without a secure element are the DNA/Butterfly and the One (except apparently for Sprint).
BarryH_GEG said:
You guys are confused. Here's what a secure element is and does...
If you're not familiar with how Wallet functions, it's a bit odd as an application goes. The Wallet app isn't the only "piece" necessary to get the Wallet service functioning, there are two other parts of the equation. One you're already familiar with: NFC (near-field communication). It's a simple, open wireless standard that transmits data over very short distances. In Wallet's case, it transmits payment data. But there's a third wheel in play that many people aren't aware of, and it's called a "secure element." Without getting too technical (eg, into things I don't at all understand), the secure element's job is to store encrypted credentials (your payment info) and tell the Wallet app "hey, these are the credentials you need to transmit to the payment terminal."
Only one card's credentials are stored on the element at a given time (obvious security reasons), which is why you need an internet connection if you want to switch your active card in Wallet. When you sign in to Wallet or change cards, the Wallet app calls up to the Google server, pulls down your credentials for a particular card, and then writes them to the secure element.
But one does not simply write to the secure element (... or walk into Mordor), it requires special permissions. Google Wallet is doing something few apps do - asking for direct, exclusive access to a secure piece of hardware in the phone. Not only that, once Google takes over the secure element, it wants total control. Because of the security concerns (and related technical difficulties) involved in sharing a secure element, Wallet and only Wallet is able to utilize the internal secure element on a Wallet-enabled device. That means Google is directly managing every layer of the process. http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...why-the-carrier-is-still-allowed-to-block-it/
People got Wallet working on the VZW GN by side-loading it; much like everyone else who's running Wallet even though it's not carrier or region supported for their particular device . VZW's beef is that they don't trust third parties to use security-enabled h/w that VZW can't control on VZW-sold devices. When VZW realized people were by-passing the process they, with Google's help, did the following...
So Google Wallet has never officially been available for Verizon, on any smartphone. However for months now users have been able to side-load Google’s awesome Wallet app for mobile NFC payments using the web store, or installing a custom ROM. Today however it appears that Google’s pulled the backend plug. http://androidcommunity.com/google-wallet-gets-pulled-from-verizon-galaxy-nexus-20120914/
If the VZW GN didn't have a secure element Wallet would have never worked. The only two phones I've heard about without a secure element are the DNA/Butterfly and the One (except apparently for Sprint).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow. Thank you for that reply. Just one thing I'm confused about. Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work. With that in mind, does this mean that the secure element is software that could potentially be added on afterwards by, possibly, a third party source like someone on XDA, or does it have to be built into the phone initially?
dsass600 said:
Wow. Thank you for that reply. Just one thing I'm confused about. Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work. With that in mind, does this mean that the secure element is software that could potentially be added on afterwards by, possibly, a third party source like someone on XDA, or does it have to be built into the phone initially?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. Really great explanation of secure elements but I also agree. I had the galaxy s3 to mobile edition and all files, libs and what not where pulled from the sprint version and made flashable to all s3s.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
TheBishopOfSoho said:
"Blatant" misinformation? Hardly. Try googling it, only Sprint editions of the One support wallet, there are many and varied references to other One versions lacking the hardware to support Wallet in its current incarnation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm glad someone already posted that link about people getting it working before I came back to check this thread. Stop misleading people. I already told you previously that I understood the lack of a secure element, but that it was still possible (at least at one point) to get it working. There's no need to put down others just because you feel so sure about your own knowledge. -.-
dsass600 said:
Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All Samsung's NFC-equipped devices have a secure element (which is h/w). What you guys are talking about is missing s/w necessary to provide access to it. I'm guessing in the cases you're mentioning they were carrier SGS3's and the missing s/w was a carrier-requested "enhancement" specific to their SGS3. It's kind of like carrier's pulling the FM radio s/w but leaving the h/w which allows people to later get the functionality back.
http://nfctimes.com/news/samsung-embed-secure-element-galaxy-s-iii-other-nfc-phones
In the case of the DNA/Butterfly and non-Sprint One’s the physical secure element has been omitted and no amount of s/w can reverse that.
This is a pure guess on my part but HTC not providing a secure element is probably because they don't want to deal with the administration of it. Much like MAC addresses, secure elements are serialized and need to be tracked on a per-device basis which means maintaining a database and supporting Google in dealing with borked secure elements (which happens a lot). And that includes replacing the NFC chip if the secure element gets borked which would/could be a warranty claim. With so little carrier support for Wallet it's not a bad strategy as outside XDA people wouldn't miss access to it. And as far as I know Wallet's the only app that currently requires the presence of a secure element.
Make sure you put 1* reviews on your Banking apps or all apps that need updating to support face unlock, hopefully it will help speed up the development and support of face unlock on the pixel 4. I am really missing fingerprint unlock on my apps!
Demolition49 said:
Make sure you put 1* reviews on your Banking apps or all apps that need updating to support face unlock, hopefully it will help speed up the development and support of face unlock on the pixel 4. I am really missing fingerprint unlock on my apps!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why? I just contacted my credit union asking for them to add support. Maybe larger national banks and stuff should have been aware and had support ready but smaller, more local institutions might just need to know that it's a thing on Android now.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using XDA Labs
In the Play Store, you can reach out to contact each app's development team via email. I've written to Chase, Bank of America, Mint, Credit Karma, and the other apps I use. Some developers are aware that they need to update, others aren't. Here are some of the responses I've received.
My original email (to each app):
Please update the Android app to support the biometric API so that I can use the secure face unlock on my Pixel 4! Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bank of America:
Thank you for your feedback and we apologize for the inconvenience. We are working to update to the latest biometric authentication for the Pixel 4 and expect to have a supporting app shortly. For now, sign-in to the app using your online ID and password. Please look out for an app update soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chase:
We'll be happy to review your request to update the
Android App.
Ivan, please note that the Chase Mobile App will work on
any Android smart phone or tablet running Android
operating system 5.0 (Lollipop) or higher. The minimum
operating system is 5.0 or higher. If your mobile phone
does not have the minimum requirement, the Chase Mobile
app will not be compatible.
We want our mobile app users to have the best experience
possible, so we regularly test chase.com using the most
current versions of operating systems. Since some mobile
app functionality may not work well on older operating
systems, we ask that you perform these updates. We
recommend you update your operating system and application
to the newest versions available. If your device isn't set
up to receive updates automatically, you can get the We
recommend you update your operating system and application
to the newest versions available.
We appreciate your business and thank you for choosing
Chase.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Credit Karma:
To determine if your Touch ID or Face ID function is turned on or off, go into your settings by clicking the icon in the top right corner of the app. The directions are the same whether you’re using Touch ID or Face ID.
If Touch or Face ID is turned on you will see a green circle with a white check mark.
If it’s turned off, simply click the empty circle and you’ll be prompted with a message stating the fingerprints or face registered on your phone can be used to access your Credit Karma account. Click “OK” to this prompt and you will be asked to enter your PIN to confirm this change.
Touch or Face ID is now turned on and you will be allowed to use this function to access the Credit Karma app moving forward.
Please note that if you log out of your account, the next time you open the app you’ll be prompted to enter your email address and password.
Thanks so much,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been sending further follow-ups to the ones who clearly don't understand what we are asking.
The more people who contact them, the more they'll understand that their apps are the problem by not using the current API.
I think Chase already stated that they were going to have an update before the end of the year. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Robinhood works!
btonetbone said:
In the Play Store, you can reach out to contact each app's development team via email. I've written to Chase, Bank of America, Mint, Credit Karma, and the other apps I use. Some developers are aware that they need to update, others aren't. Here are some of the responses I've received.
My original email (to each app):
Bank of America:
Chase:
Credit Karma:
I've been sending further follow-ups to the ones who clearly don't understand what we are asking.
The more people who contact them, the more they'll understand that their apps are the problem by not using the current API.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nice work, I have left reviews and also contacted all my Banks via email. Hopefully it speeds up the process.
Throwing up a bunch of one-star reviews won't help, and all it serves to do is make the rater (you) look petty and childish. I'll send an email to my institutions, like a grownup, and go from there.
Getting in contact directly works best, via the play store will get you to the android app devs. I usually go through Twitter and you get a spokesperson who wouldn't know an apk from an adb and will give a stock response of soon™.
Remind them that the old biometric APIs are deprecated and that they should update to current versioning. Should anything happen they don't want to be the story of the bank that wasn't able to keep up.
Honestly I'm not missing it that much for my bank that much because I use LastPass which autofills it quickly. I do miss it for Outlook though because I have to do a pin.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
So Far E-Trade has been updated to the Pixels face Unlock... I sent an email via the app store also to a credit union hoping they will update their app. I'm hoping within the next 2 weeks to a month that all major banks will update...
How secure if this anyway? I mean, my banking account has a password. I enter that password in my banking app to log into my account. In the future I will use my facial scan to log into my banking app.
Does that mean my banking account will have two password (1x password + 1x facial scan) oder will my password be stored somewhere in the app or on android and simply be passed on the my facial scan is verified?
Both do not sound very secure to me.
If you don't feel it's secure then just don't use the app.. simple. I trust that the banks know the risks and have mitigated them. After all they are the ones on the hook if there's fraud.
bobby janow said:
If you don't feel it's secure then just don't use the app.. simple. I trust that the banks know the risks and have mitigated them. After all they are the ones on the hook if there's fraud.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really the informative answer I was looking for.
I wouldn't blindly trust a bank app or any of the other countless apps that would use my facial scan.
What happens if your facial scan gets stolen / leaked. Everyone with that information will for ever be able to access your data. And you can't even change your access code like you would be able to with a password.
And it seems like you also have no idea where your facial scan is being saved, and how it is secured / locked down. Maybe it is just a plain file on your phone's storage? You don't seem to know.
Why no simply write down all your passwords in a .txt file and save it on your sdcard? That would alteast have the advantage that you could change your password at some point.
Utini said:
Not really the informative answer I was looking for.
I wouldn't blindly trust a bank app or any of the other countless apps that would use my facial scan.
What happens if your facial scan gets stolen / leaked. Everyone with that information will for ever be able to access your data. And you can't even change your access code like you would be able to with a password.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't the face unlock for that device only? It's not like someone can install your bank app on their phone, somehow use your face unlock information, and spoof you on that device. Also there's still 2 step verification, at least with my bank, so the new app would still need to get the verification code. If anything, it's easier to do with your password because that's something that can be typed in and then somehow get the verification code text.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
Utini said:
Not really the informative answer I was looking for.
I wouldn't blindly trust a bank app or any of the other countless apps that would use my facial scan.
What happens if your facial scan gets stolen / leaked. Everyone with that information will for ever be able to access your data. And you can't even change your access code like you would be able to with a password.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure of the question you are asking. It seemed rhetorical to me basically commenting on how you don't think fingerprint, facial or password entry is secure on your app. I don't think any of it is stored in the cloud but nonetheless it's probably not as secure as walking into your bank and transacting with a teller. Even websites probably aren't as secure as you wish they were. So what exactly are you asking that you expect a reply to? You can perhaps check with your bank as to what your liability would be if your account got hacked.
EeZeEpEe said:
Isn't the face unlock for that device only? It's not like someone can install your bank app on their phone, somehow use your face unlock information, and spoof you on that device. Also there's still 2 step verification, at least with my bank, so the new app would still need to get the verification code. If anything, it's easier to do with your password because that's something that can be typed in and then somehow get the verification code text.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh is it? That makes it defeniately more secure. But then I would still like to know how it is ensured that my facial scan only works with my specific mobile device and not with any other mobile device.
Yep for banking there is still 2 step verficiation. Good point. But I was actually thinking more about e.g. KeePass.
bobby janow said:
I'm not sure of the question you are asking. It seemed rhetorical to me basically commenting on how you don't think fingerprint, facial or password entry is secure on your app. I don't think any of it is stored in the cloud but nonetheless it's probably not as secure as walking into your bank and transacting with a teller. Even websites probably aren't as secure as you wish they were. So what exactly are you asking that you expect a reply to? You can perhaps check with your bank as to what your liability would be if your account got hacked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe I didn't explain my question good enough. I will try again:
Currently I would unlock e.g. my KeePass Database with a password.
In the future I would use my facial scan for that.
I wonder at what point my facial scan will access my password of the KeePass Database, because it somehow has to know my password in order to unlock KeePass?
And in that case my password suddenly isn't saved only in my head anymore but also within android or another app (because Face Unlock has to somehow know it?).
Or will my KeePass database get a second "password" which is my facial scan data?
In that case I want to make sure that my facial scan is very secure and can't be stolen. Because if it turns up in smth like "haveibeenpwnd.com" everyone will forever be able to access all my files with my leaked facial scan which I cannot even change to something different anymore.
Utini said:
Maybe I didn't explain my question good enough. I will try again:
Currently I would unlock e.g. my KeePass Database with a password.
In the future I would use my facial scan for that.
I wonder at what point my facial scan will access my password of the KeePass Database, because it somehow has to know my password in order to unlock KeePass?
And in that case my password suddenly isn't saved only in my head anymore but also within android or another app (because Face Unlock has to somehow know it?).
Or will my KeePass database get a second "password" which is my facial scan data?
In that case I want to make sure that my facial scan is very secure and can't be stolen. Because if it turns up in smth like "haveibeenpwnd.com" everyone will forever be able to access all my files with my leaked facial scan which I cannot even change to something different anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used LastPass and I think it's not different then when I died the fingerprint option for it. There's a master password for the account and biometric login is, again, just for the individual device. And again, there's 2 step verification at least with LastPass, for whenever you set up.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
EeZeEpEe said:
I used LastPass and I think it's not different then when I died the fingerprint option for it. There's a master password for the account and biometric login is, again, just for the individual device. And again, there's 2 step verification at least with LastPass, for whenever you set up.
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds interesting and secure. Now I am interested in how it is ensured that my fingerprint / facial scan will only work with my specific mobile device and that the stolen data from my device can't be used from another device
Utini said:
Oh is it? That makes it defeniately more secure. But then I would still like to know how it is ensured that my facial scan only works with my specific mobile device and not with any other mobile device.
Yep for banking there is still 2 step verficiation. Good point. But I was actually thinking more about e.g. KeePass.
Maybe I didn't explain my question good enough. I will try again:
Currently I would unlock e.g. my KeePass Database with a password.
In the future I would use my facial scan for that.
I wonder at what point my facial scan will access my password of the KeePass Database, because it somehow has to know my password in order to unlock KeePass?
And in that case my password suddenly isn't saved only in my head anymore but also within android or another app (because Face Unlock has to somehow know it?).
Or will my KeePass database get a second "password" which is my facial scan data?
In that case I want to make sure that my facial scan is very secure and can't be stolen. Because if it turns up in smth like "haveibeenpwnd.com" everyone will forever be able to access all my files with my leaked facial scan which I cannot even change to something different anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I see now. This really has more to do with your password manager than the bank. Unfortunately, I don't use a PM even though I suppose I should. Everyone says it's pretty secure. Since I don't really know what I'm talking about at this point I'll give it a shot anyway. lol
I don't think the facial scan or the fingerprint scan is saved anywhere other than your device. But I do use fingerprint (or did) scans on my banking app. If I change my password on the banking site my fingerprint scan will no longer work on the app. I would first have to change my password on the app and then reregister my fingerprint when the new password is entered. Can we compare it to the face scan at this point? I mean you can't change your fingerprints either right? Before I go on, am I reading your concerns correctly?
Utini said:
Sounds interesting and secure. Now I am interested in how it is ensured that my fingerprint / facial scan will only work with my specific mobile device and that the stolen data from my device can't be used from another device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/9517039?hl=en
Maybe this confirms it?View attachment 4860867
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk