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 !
I just won a free Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant with Bell Mobility, but which one should I keep? I love my Nexus One, and it seems that there is a lot more development for the N1 right now. I am a rom flashing junkie, love to tinker with my phone, and make update.zip files for fun...
That being said, clearly the N1 is better.. but only for right now. Does anyone have any insight on when the Galaxy will get as much attention? It is on 5-6 networks already after all..
Thanks!
Either way, lets get a rom dump and see what we can play with
fiftyclick said:
I just won a free Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant with Bell Mobility, but which one should I keep? I love my Nexus One, and it seems that there is a lot more development for the N1 right now. I am a rom flashing junkie, love to tinker with my phone, and make update.zip files for fun...
That being said, clearly the N1 is better.. but only for right now. Does anyone have any insight on when the Galaxy will get as much attention? It is on 5-6 networks already after all..
Thanks!
Either way, lets get a rom dump and see what we can play with
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Galaxy S probably has the better hardware.
N1 will continue to get android releases from google first ... once the Galaxy S is out on all networks and widely sold, I would expect custom rom development to explode for it (and be the same if not better than for the n1)
=> I would keep the galaxy (based on better hardware alone)
i would keep both. you have the best of both world. N1 which is will have the most updated android and SGS which has best hardware at this moment. but with some issues on software. but that will be all figured out. play with both and then make your decision.
BTW, hating on you so much. lucky SOB.
Whatever you do, don't get rid of the N1. Either keep both and hope the Galaxy issues get resolved (GPS AND Compass) or sell the Galaxy. The Galaxy has much faster graphics performance and built in HDMI out via USB but, unfortunately, the GPS and Compass issue make it a no go for a day to day user. The thing about the Nexus is that it will continue to get updates first and,likely, there will be much more development on it. Likely, this will result in much better tuned software and possibly even open up even more functionality. With the core hardware issues of the Samsung, you are at the mercy of Samsung and their track record is not so good. I actually bought a Vibrant (Galaxy S) and returned it.
Hey! I'm a new Nexus One user. I've been using the Galaxy S for a long time and in the end chose the N1 over it. Yes, the hardware on the GS is better than the N1, but really, for me it all came down to keeping the phone that made me feel heavenly -- the N1!
You will be better off in the long run with the Nexus One...
I sold my n1 for the sgs and I'm not looking back.. true Multitouch, memory ,gpu and super amoled was enough for me. N1 was great, but the sgs is better IMO... development is starting pretty well. Especially soon....
I just found out today from various pages online that the galaxy tab is already selling with froyo. Now my understanding is that most of you might already know about it ? When samsung postponed their 23rd sept. release for froyo on the SGS, I was still optimistic hoping that the update would be worth waiting for and solve a majority if not all of our problems with the phone, including lag, whenever it came. But now I learn the update does already exist, but only for a newer device! What am I, as a customer supposed to make of this ? If there already is a froyo firmware existing with the samsung's TouchWiz UI, WHY is not brought to the SGS yet ? Earlier I sympathised with samsung thinking that they're putting decent effort in the froyo update before releasing it to end users. But if this is the scenario, I am very upset....
Mod request: Please move thread to I9000 General section.
Froyo IS coming to SGS, it will be available from this week onwards starting with T-Mobile as you might have already seen on all android forums, blogs and websites.
Galaxy Tab is a big product for Samsung, since it's initial firmware is based on Froyo, I’m pretty sure Samsung is putting a lot more effort into getting Froyo out on the Tab compared to having it on the SGS. Its perfectly understandable. Without Froyo they cant release the Tab, but SGS still functions with 2.1.
I know that. Isn't the hardware on both devices the same ? So why wasn't there a simultaneous release of galaxy tab with froyo and froyo for galaxy s ? What takes things so long for SGS ?
I dont know for sure, but most likely the hardware is similar (if not the same). But the firmware has few differences, for example Samsung had to modify it to fix screen scaling issues for 1024x600; and if you have seen some of the Galaxy Tab demo videos, you might have seen that some of it’s UI components are different too (video conferencing interface, eMail client, etc..). Maybe Samsung is putting most of their developers on Tab's firmware development giving less priority to SGS.
Yes well, this is exactly what I'm saying is wrong, for a company like samsung. Especially in this case for nearly identical devices...
As far as the resolution is concerned, being an engineer, I can say it's not that big an ordeal to scale it down. And if you're saying that the galaxy tab has more components/apps out of the box, then that would logically imply that froyo for galaxy s should have arrived first, as it would require lesser development time. Instead, we're seeing months of delays! How is that justified ?
Prasad007 said:
I just found out today from various pages online that the galaxy tab is already selling with froyo. Now my understanding is that most of you might already know about it ? When samsung postponed their 23rd sept. release for froyo on the SGS, I was still optimistic hoping that the update would be worth waiting for and solve a majority if not all of our problems with the phone, including lag, whenever it came. But now I learn the update does already exist, but only for a newer device! What am I, as a customer supposed to make of this ? If there already is a froyo firmware existing with the samsung's TouchWiz UI, WHY is not brought to the SGS yet ? Earlier I sympathised with samsung thinking that they're putting decent effort in the froyo update before releasing it to end users. But if this is the scenario, I am very upset....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be wonderful if the Tab was already selling. Any idea where to get one right now?
I think samsung has some stability problems with TW crap he loads into SGS. Tab is cleaner (no TW), thus didnt require so much TW porting (and all apps developed for Tab are with 2.2 in mind).
Thats one side, because core system aint close to perfect too.
I see. But the tab has TW 3.0 as well from what I've read in this forum. Your other point however, makes a lot of sense..
This might be the wrong place for this, but I was wondering about the feasibility of there being a WP8 Custom ROM for this device. Right now I have an Android phone but was looking for a cheap WP phone to play with the OS and see if I might want to jump ship in the future with a better model. Right now I have it down to the HD7 and the Lumia 710 as Im on T-Mobile. Both can be had for about $150. I was just wondering which, if either, would have a chance of getting WP8 in some form to play with down the road. Thanks!
+1
+1
waiting for an answer too ...
can anyone help ?
Hi, I think this isn't very likely to happen (or not in the near future), but if there's any device to get WP8 rom, it's most likely HTC HD7, as it was the first WP7 device to have a custom rom, because of it's similarity with HTC HD2, which even now has big developer interest and gets newest leaked updates first (like WP7.8)
Hi all.
Anybody knows if Ubuntu Touch for Galaxy S 4 Active is being made?
Can we use the standard galaxy S4 build, if they manage to get it working on their system?
It is basically the same (same Processor, sound device, etc.), except for the camera.
I am willing to give 10 USD to the person who creates the first working beta
(I know its not much, but i am a student, so i dont have much money right now.. )
All the best,
Toby
Questions and help issues go in Q&A and Help section
Thread moved
Thanks
FNM
TobiasFP said:
Hi all.
Anybody knows if Ubuntu Touch for Galaxy S 4 Active is being made?
Can we use the standard galaxy S4 build, if they manage to get it working on their system?
It is basically the same (same Processor, sound device, etc.), except for the camera.
I am willing to give 10 USD to the person who creates the first working beta
(I know its not much, but i am a student, so i dont have much money right now.. )
All the best,
Toby
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It also has a different screen amongst other things, meaning it needs a different kernel - different drivers. I wouldn't hold my breath on ANY more roms coming to the i9295. It simply didn't gain enough traction!
Cederic said:
It also has a different screen amongst other things, meaning it needs a different kernel - different drivers. I wouldn't hold my breath on ANY more roms coming to the i9295. It simply didn't gain enough traction!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the pick me up
But shouldnt all that needs changing be the blobs for the CM build?
Since Ubuntu touch relies on CyanogenMod to work, and since we have a pretty stable CM rom going, couldnt we just use the blobs from the i9505 build with minor adjustments to get going?
or have i misunderstood the build process?
TobiasFP said:
Thanks for the pick me up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh, yes I'm a bit bitter. I'm planning to sell my active and get a nexus 5 instead thanks to the lack of developments, so I can't help but rub it in a bit on the way out. While there's been some upswing lately for the i537 thanks to safestrap, none of that translates to the i9295.
TobiasFP said:
But shouldnt all that needs changing be the blobs for the CM build?
Since Ubuntu touch relies on CyanogenMod to work, and since we have a pretty stable CM rom going, couldnt we just use the blobs from the i9505 build with minor adjustments to get going?
or have i misunderstood the build process?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I'm using the CM build from this forum as my daily user, and "pretty stable" is a good description. Not stable enough really, and the most pressing issue is the lack of official CM support to make it so. I don't know how easy it is, but quite obviously there's more to it than you'd think or it would have happened already. Samsung is (apparently) notorious for not making it easy in any way, so... I wouldn't hold out hope. Not since this device turned out to be so slowly adopted that there just doesn't seem to be enough developers interested.
Perhaps this will change over the year to come, but I doubt it, and I for one don't have time for it.
Cederic said:
Heh, yes I'm a bit bitter. I'm planning to sell my active and get a nexus 5 instead thanks to the lack of developments, so I can't help but rub it in a bit on the way out. While there's been some upswing lately for the i537 thanks to safestrap, none of that translates to the i9295.
Well, I'm using the CM build from this forum as my daily user, and "pretty stable" is a good description. Not stable enough really, and the most pressing issue is the lack of official CM support to make it so. I don't know how easy it is, but quite obviously there's more to it than you'd think or it would have happened already. Samsung is (apparently) notorious for not making it easy in any way, so... I wouldn't hold out hope. Not since this device turned out to be so slowly adopted that there just doesn't seem to be enough developers interested.
Perhaps this will change over the year to come, but I doubt it, and I for one don't have time for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, of course it is not easy, but what i was saying is, that when the i9505 gets going, which i believe it will, since they have been working on it for about a month now, i believe it could "easily" be converted to the i9295.
The i9505 is a lot more similar to the i9295 than the i537, they both share the same Krait processor, and the screen is already fully supported in the current CM build of the i9295, so i dont see that as a problem.
Of course it will take some time, but i believe (okay, a better word would be "hope") that when the i9505 has Ubuntu Touch ready, it will not take long for us.
See the development status here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2274387&page=4