Nokia Lumia 800 - Windows Phone 8 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

Is it possible to install Windows 8 on Nokia Lumia 800?
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk

silentarts said:
Is it possible to install Windows 8 on Nokia Lumia 800?
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
simply: NO
you cant install WP8 to WP7 devices....

silentarts said:
Is it possible to install Windows 8 on Nokia Lumia 800?
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it is not possible.
Windows Phone 7 uses the Windows CE kernel, the same kernel of Windows Mobile, which is why the OS would still run ultra-smooth on very low spec devices.
Windows Phone 8 however, uses the Windows NT kernel, replacing the aging CE kernel. Personally, I think MS could've prevented abandoning WP7 devices if they had used the NT kernel for WP7.
NT kernel AFAIK requires a dual-core processor which WP7 does not use. It also uses Secure Boot UEFI, which the firmware needs to be UEFI-based. Put simply, if you even manage to get WP8 on your device, its not going to run smoothly. Microsoft tested this and decided not to releae WP8 for WP7 devices as WP7 devices were simply using outdated SoCs

Related

Whats the Best OS for Gaming?

Hey All,
like it say in the title - Whats the Best OS for Windows Gaming?
is it:
Windows 7 (32 / 64)
Windows Vista (32 /64)
Windows XP Professional Edition (32)
Windows Home Edition (32)
XP will slowly be phased out. However at the moment, for compatibility it has to be XP.
In 1-2 years it will be Windows 7.
Infact soon, we should have cloud gaming services (at an incredibly high monthly premium of course ) but that will mean any OS will be as good as another - including Linux.
I think it has to be XP! I run Win 7 an would never go back to XP but its a great OS! Very economical! Uses little resources! But its low on features compared to 7 like Aero,Aero Snap and stuff like that. But Win 7 has the feature for installing drivers automatically instead of that annoying Windows Update window asking you what to do.
So:
7 for features.
XP for erm.. being sort of low resources.. it uses less of your computer and leaves more for your games.
Would tend to agree I've XP, vista & 7 and XP is still best for gaming IMHO...but ya gotta love 7
MS-DOS, by far.
P.S.
I don't even have to explain why.
It speaks for itself....
fKngFtd said:
MS-DOS, by far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL!! WTF?!?!?!?!
ATM an runing:
Windows 7 Home Premium 64x - Dell Studio 1558 (Laptop)
Windows 7 Ultimate 32x - Dell Dimension 9150 (Dell XPS 400)
The Only problem about windows 7 i've had is a runtime error, which lead to a backup and a fresh reload of Windows...
Meaning my ROM development for the Universal has been put on hold, while i sort out the problem
Edit
Although in 7 Profession ---> you can get a VM of windows XP Pro with SP3
But i like the Vista Deisgn for the startbar, as its not as blocky as 7... but lame sa u cant view the different windows =/
Second Edit:
Although i like the Windows Vista design, i have to for some strange reson Virtually load:
Windows 7 Ultimate
Windows XP Pro SP3
Linux Ubuntu 9.10 / 10.4 LST
Linux Mint 8
i dont now why, but i just have to.
Then for the windows Copy i load:
AVG 9 Free
Firefox + Chomifox
Adobe Reader
Adobe Flash
Java
Open Office
i dunno why... its like an ORD but for VMs... er... a clever name?
VMD - Virtual Machine Disorder =]
fKngFtd said:
MS-DOS, by far.
P.S.
I don't even have to explain why.
It speaks for itself....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oregon trail ****yes
I have 2GB of ram and it's not enough for gaming under Win7, so I use XP.
with 4GB and above, Win7.
Still reckon xp is the best 7 uses up too many resources for my liking
Sent from my MotoA953 using XDA App
EddFace said:
Oregon trail ****yes
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
EddFace has cholera, do you want to rest?...no.
EddFace has died, everyone in your party is dead, you lasted 4 weeks and made it 3 miles. I told you you needed 20 oxen and 1000 lbs of food, but you came back from the shop with a damn phone...
Game Over.
I really do miss XP,it was allways better than vista but 7 just blew it out of the water.
Does XP even support dx11 (7 is the clear winner if not)? Haven't used it in so long, I'm unsure...
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
BladeMaestor said:
Still reckon xp is the best 7 uses up too many resources for my liking
Sent from my MotoA953 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
XP is an os that's what, 10-13 years old? It's going to use less resources. Plus, 7 has superfetch that loads the memory in for quick execution.
7 is the best. Vista wasn't bad, but 7 feels smoother, and XP is losing support for games fast. Battlefield 3 is only going to support dx10/dx11.
Win 7 is it unfortunately no dx 11 support. In xp
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
XP (any variation) for anything that doesn't need DX 10 or above. Win7 otherwise.
Windows 7 64-bit for modern games. XP is good enuf for teh olde ones.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
@ OP
Windows 7 is the best all-rounder, here's why:
1. DirectX 11 support
2. DirectX 11 support
3. DirectX 11 support
4. DirectX 11 support
5. DirectX 11 support
6. DirectX 11 support
7. DirectX 11 support
8. DirectX 11 support
9. DirectX 11 support
10. DirectX 11 support
11. DirectX 11 support
Unless, your specs suck, which means your GPU doesn't support Dx11, which means you'd be better off sticking to gaming on the console. PC gaming is an expensive hobby, and I wouldn't wish it on my worse enemies.
New hardware - Windows 7
Old hardware - Windows XP
Oldest hardware - Dos / don't even try to play games.
xp xp xp xp : D
Swyped from my HTC HD2 using tapatalk
I think this is turning into the age old question of which is better, slow and pretty or fast and ugly.
I don't think PC gaming is expensive as it used to be( I haven't updated my hardware in over 2 years and still run pretty much every game out there.). Most games can play on relatively old hardware because they're made to fit the specs of ps3 and Xbox which are getting on a bit now.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
I've been a garner gamer for 10 years long, and haven't been perked off against Windows or any other running linux based OS. I have an alter ego that says "When it smells like Trout, Get your butt out!" SO my favor goes towards Bill Gates (Koodos)

Do Windows Phone 7 devices need to be multi-core?

The debate is raging and is splitting the community in 2...
So I thought lets have a poll.
Let's be honest, even with a single core, WP7 devices DON'T lag. But just because having multi-core becoming a fashion statement, do WE need it?
Only spec whores care about dual core and overclocking...I've had this since December 2010, I don't get lags..WP doesn't need it...yet.
Sent from The Syndicate using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
i believe, in fact, that is a consumer gimmick.
consumers are 'bred' to think, "the bigger, the better."
and a dual-core is better than a single-core.
just isn't necessary for WP7 like it is with the fragmented Android.
so, yeah, it is all about the specs.
sh4d0w86 said:
i believe, in fact, that is a consumer gimmick.
consumers are 'bred' to think, "the bigger, the better."
and a dual-core is better than a single-core.
just isn't necessary for WP7 like it is with the fragmented Android.
so, yeah, it is all about the specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree...the fact about dual core processors is this - a dual core processor is just half the job done. You applications need to RECOGNIZE the other damn processor and make use of it. (1 example is the Safari for iPhone 4S that recognizes the dual core chipset and makes optimum use of it.)
Windows phone don't need dual core to run apps casue thats how its built.
Microsoft is very good with support for old hardware like you can run windows 7 on an old pentium 4 pc which is good that unlike android almost all windows phones will get newer updates as they are rolled out.
Also remember Nokia is aiming for the budget phone customers as It admitted long ago that the Higher end phone market has too much competition for it while the lower end is still a strong point for nokia, hence their partnership with MS makes sense.
And keeping costs low will help both Nokia and MS to crack the phone market a bit more
Please remember the famous Bill Gates quote...
"who would ever need more than 256kb of RAM?" ( not a direct quote, blame my memory )
The OS in the current state doesn't need that obviously, it works flawlessly. But dual-core gives us space for improvement - both in the OS and apps. So...it's not necessary, but i wouldn't go as far as to say it's not needed.
But still, we don't need to put dual-core chips in every Windows Phone. A wide range of prices, equipment etc. is definitely a perk.
What's to debate?
Do current Windows phones have multiple cores? No.
Do they work? Yes.
Case closed. On to the next thread...
My answer, Why not!? If it can be done without negatively affecting functionality, the technology should push forward leading to more opportunities for developers.
DoogieDC said:
What's to debate?
Do current Windows phones have multiple cores? No.
Do they work? Yes.
Case closed. On to the next thread...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Case is not closed. Right now, even Mango phones do not support dual core processors. That is the main reason why HTC is still using single core processor in its flagship windows phone (Titan / Ultimate).
Multi core support will come with Apollo update.

Swiching To Lumia 800?

Somebody offered me a nokia lumia 800. Should i accept it? I mean it has 1.5GHz Qualcomm single-core processor and everithing else like the o 2X has exept the 5mp camera. What Do You THink?
Lumia has a 1,4Ghz CPU. And it's running WP7.5 :laugh: :laugh:
Lumia 800 has a slightly smaller screen (3.7 inches) than Optimus 2x (4.0 inches).
And where did you read that Optimus 2x has a 5 mp camera?
But honestly, I'd recommend you to stick with O2X, at least until we get a stable CM10 (if you're rooted) or the official ICS update rolls out
vanmarek said:
Lumia has a 1,4Ghz CPU. And it's running WP7.5 :laugh: :laugh:
Lumia 800 has a slightly smaller screen (3.7 inches) than Optimus 2x (4.0 inches).
And where did you read that Optimus 2x has a 5 mp camera?
But honestly, I'd recommend you to stick with O2X, at least until we get a stable CM10 (if you're rooted) or the official ICS update rolls out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I reffered to the lumia 800 that it has 5megapixel camera not the o2x.....and what is the problem with the 7.5 os? the cpu is fine it is 1.5GHz and it is qualcomm why it is the o2x better? just because it has dualcore....I don't really like it beacause the games are not running in hd like asphalt 7 or nfs most wanted....and yes I have installed cm10 nightly and the phone is much more powerfull and fast smooth etc.....but i want gaming on the phone and I prefer windows phone os han android
ilooze said:
I reffered to the lumia 800 that it has 5megapixel camera not the o2x.....and what is the problem with the 7.5 os? the cpu is fine it is 1.5GHz and it is qualcomm why it is the o2x better? just because it has dualcore....I don't really like it beacause the games are not running in hd like asphalt 7 or nfs most wanted....and yes I have installed cm10 nightly and the phone is much more powerfull and fast smooth etc.....but i want gaming on the phone and I prefer windows phone os han android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looked as if you meant that the O2x had an 5mp camera, but anyway, who told you the Lumia 800 has an 5mp camera and 1.5Ghz CPU?
Full specs:
http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_lumia_800-4240.php
As for the gaming, it's pretty much up to you. You're the one supposed to enjoy it so you should decide on that matter
vanmarek said:
It looked as if you meant that the O2x had an 5mp camera, but anyway, who told you the Lumia 800 has an 5mp camera and 1.5Ghz CPU?
Full specs:
http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_lumia_800-4240.php
As for the gaming, it's pretty much up to you. You're the one supposed to enjoy it so you should decide on that matter
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ohhhh:laugh: first of all excuse me ) I readed the specs but i dont know why i wrote there 5mp camera and 1.5ghz sorry really sorry ) ......So the lumia has 8mp like the o2x better display the pixel density is bigger and it has Nokia ClearBlack display and qualcomm cpu.....I don't think that the lumia 800 is worse than the o2x the differences are the cpu, os and battery...do you think that the lumia is worse than o2x? and thank you for your answers
windows phone as i read a little in google lumia or windows phone is like apple that doesn't share their codes so this is a locked phone like apple they can't share files via bluetooth with other smartphone brand it's windows to windows only
grimmyrippy said:
windows phone as i read a little in google lumia or windows phone is like apple that doesn't share their codes so this is a locked phone like apple they can't share files via bluetooth with other smartphone brand it's windows to windows only
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this doesn't matter.....I didn't used the bluetooth so much so this thing will not affect me
ilooze said:
this doesn't matter.....I didn't used the bluetooth so much so this thing will not affect me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not just the Bluetooth - the complete lack of an accessible file system in WP7.5 (and probably Wp7.8) means that you can't transfer files between a PC and the phone unless the PC has Zune installed (a la iTunes). And if you want to transfer files off the phone to a computer you don't own, and you can't install Zune on it, you're SOL. And if you want to connect the phone by USB to most stereos, the stereo won't be able to read the music files. This is a huge flaw that even BB7 and Symbian lack.
in other words, if you use your phone like a flash drive, avoid both WP and iOS like the plague.
WP8 Apollo addressed this flaw, with full UMS support, so if you're dead set on a Windows Phone, I'd recommend going for a WP8 model.
On a side note, the presence of an accessible file system in WP8 bumped it from a "fat chance" to a "maybe" on my future purchase list. While it's not as open as I'd like, I respect the fact that WP is somewhat "unified" in that OEMs aren't allowed to put awful skins on it, and that the specs are somewhat constant across the board which makes updates easier to optimize for a wide range of devices. If Android were to do this, it'd really be perfect.
I like lumia but i cant buy because have no money. Or else you gonna gave me free lols. Thanks if there someone gave is.
Sent from my Optimus Net using xda app-developers app
ilooze, ask yourself this; what do I want that the O2X don't have? You know, just don't think of it as a phone LG made, but rather something that the developers on this forum extended to a point that LG isn't needed.
Use common sense and you'll realize that the O2X has pretty much everything you need from a phone.
Custom40 said:
ilooze, ask yourself this; what do I want that the O2X don't have? You know, just don't think of it as a phone LG made, but rather something that the developers on this forum extended to a point that LG isn't needed.
Use common sense and you'll realize that the O2X has pretty much everything you need from a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well...it has the nokia clearblack screen the 1.5ghz qualcomm processor...the os....the design....and better support...I know that this device wont get wp8 but anyway it is more supported than our o2x by LG not by xda-developers
I don't think it's a good idea to switch ,Windows phone is ios like ,VERY closed ,you can't do all the tweaks you can made on android ,you can't use your phone the way you like ,you can't use it as a standard Mass storage , the following of Nokia/LG will be the same ,the lumia is stuck to 7.8 .....no upgrades......:crying:
and to finish ,the Lg display is quiet good, and go to a smaller screen won't be comfortable fo you :cyclops:
ilooze said:
well...it has the nokia clearblack screen the 1.5ghz qualcomm processor...the os....the design....and better support...I know that this device wont get wp8 but anyway it is more supported than our o2x by LG not by xda-developers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Official support doesn't matter if the support doesn't deliver functionality.
As of 2012, unmodded Android 2.2 (or even 2.1) is far more capable than WP7.8, and definitely stomps any version of iOS. Yes, it's nice that even the iPhone 3GS receives at least part of the iOS 6 update. But if that update doesn't bring its capabilities in line with the two-year-old Froyo, then what's the point?
Yes, the Lumia has awesome hardware and aesthetics, and if the aesthetics are a big selling point for you, fair enough.
Another caveat to watch out for - with WP7.5 and probably 7.8, the multitasking implementation is TERRIBLE. Their method of hibernating apps means that 3rd party apps that use push notifications are unable to function properly - you need to keep reopening the app every few hours to prevent it from "deep sleeping" and thus being completely unable to receive notifications. So if you open whatsapp once, then close it for a day or so without reopening it, any new messages you get after will never be received until you reopen the app manually. To be fair this method allows for good battery life and prevents the phone from lagging, but for those who rely on IMing this is unacceptable.
In other words, if you're a heavy user of Whatsapp, Google Talk, Facebook chat, etc then even Blackberry 7 is a better platform than WP. I did read that WP8 has proper multitasking so the problem may be solved there, but hey, it ain't coming to the old Lumias.
You don't have to be a "power user" (i.e. the kind who likes flashing custom ROMs) to benefit from the openness of Android vs WP or iOS. The issues of an inaccessible file system and poor multitasking affect everyone, not just us CM-obsessed types.
Btw, here's something ironic: Microsoft designed the Sync infotainment system in my car, which can read music off a USB device if the device is either Apple or it has an accessible file system. The only smartphone OS that can't connect via USB happens to be WP7, made by Microsoft.
edit: I hope you don't think I'm trying to badmouth WP as the devil... I acknowledge it has its strengths, and anyone who's comfortable with iOS, will be right at home with WP. However, someone who's used Android custom ROMs, is probably a different demographic and I'm just pointing out that WP isn't exactly suited for it, even less so than BlackBerry.
And old lumia after 1 update microsoft drop their support for it but in xda as long as their is important codes release by RC it keeps evolving and stabilizing, microsoft only support now for the new lumia 900 and the lumia in the future but the old ones? Never mind
Sent from my Optimus 2X using xda premium
Remember, it's not just getting updates that's important, it's what comes in the updates that also matters. Ask yourself - that iPhone 3GS may have "excellent" update support, but do those updates actually make the phone better than android?

Confused whether to get Lumia 520 or Nokia X

Hi all,
I've never used a WP device before.. but I've used a lot of android (well, very-low-end) devices and I like android very much..
It gives you 100% freedom when it comes to customization .. Launchers, Themes, and even Custom ROMS..
unfortunately, those are missing in WP..
I had a look at the OS itself and I think it's nice .. but I think it will be boring after a while..
and also android has a far wider range of apps of all sorts and games..
The good thing about WP though is the performance .. it's far better than android's (even in low-end devices)
So what's your opinion ?
Lumia 520 or Nokia X.. (What I really care about is customization and performance especially when using apps and not-so-heavy games like Asphalt maybe?)
WP & android is different os.
Also Nokia x has a different android os. It's your choice, where to go. Like as get Mac or Windows or linux.
MS abandon nokia X project!
Inviato dal mio Ativ S con Tapatalk 2
SAM209 said:
Hi all,
I've never used a WP device before.. but I've used a lot of android (well, very-low-end) devices and I like android very much..
It gives you 100% freedom when it comes to customization .. Launchers, Themes, and even Custom ROMS..
unfortunately, those are missing in WP..
I had a look at the OS itself and I think it's nice .. but I think it will be boring after a while..
and also android has a far wider range of apps of all sorts and games..
The good thing about WP though is the performance .. it's far better than android's (even in low-end devices)
So what's your opinion ?
Lumia 520 or Nokia X.. (What I really care about is customization and performance especially when using apps and not-so-heavy games like Asphalt maybe?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey.
I've used both phones and I have both of them currently, though I use 520. Windows Phone 8 is way better than Android in terms of performance in low end devices. If you want to play games like Asphalt 8, then I would recommend 520. Nokia X cannot handle that game since the way Android utilizes the RAM is...well, not good. Apart from that, 520 has a better camera, auto-focus and a whole host of other features.
The biggest thing is that Microsoft has abandoned the X-series. The Nokia X Platform has become sort of obsolete. 520 is currently getting Windows Phone 8.1 which will further improve the experience and will bring more personalization options, but it would still be behind Android.
I would recommend that if you go for Windows Phone, get Lumia 525 instead of 520, if it's available, as it has 1 GB RAM, and that will allow you to use more apps, which will be unavailable for low-RAM Windows Phones.
Hope you found this helpfull.

Will there be support for other processors such as AMD CPU's/APU's?

Just wondering if there will be support for AMD processors in the near future?
Has anyone had any success with an AMD CPU/APU?
moman2000 said:
Just wondering if there will be support for AMD processors in the near future?
Has anyone had any success with an AMD CPU/APU?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well...short answer....no.
It use Intel dev tools for android.
And amd does not build android devices unlike Intel.
They need to switch to virtualbox like other emulators.
But it will have slower video support.
To add to what @tailslol said, Android Studio (which is what Remix OS Player is based on) requires HAXM to run. AMD doesn't support HAXM. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news...

Categories

Resources