Related
As the title suggests, I'm considering jumping from my HTC One to the Nokia Lumia 1020, and I have some questions. If this is the wrong forum, I'm sorry.
1. Is it possible (even through a hack) to set a homescreen background? I used to do this on the WP 7 themes on my iPhone, and it looked great with transparent tiles.
2. Has Google gotten into WP8? Voice, Gmail, Play Music?
3. Photo editing. What sort of post-processing options are there? I must have had 10gb of just photo apps on my iPhone, and I'm kinda struggling now on Android.
4. Keyboards? I've become a Swiftkey addict. Is there anything comparable to this in Redmond's garden?
5. Twitter and Facebook? My fiance has a Lumia 900, however her Facebook and Twitter apps look awful. Tweetbot was the best Twitter client I've ever used, so my standards are high.
Thank you in advance for any insight.
Start screen backgrounds are still not supported. There are pseudo-hacks to do it, using a large array of customized tiles, but there's still black or white behind them. The hacking scene or WP8 has been very limited.
Gmail works fine on WP8, as it did on WP7. There's no official app that I know of, though. Google has no official Music app for the OS, but there are plenty of third party ones (I cannot comment on the quality as I use Pandora and Zune/Xbox Music Pass). There's also Nokia's music app, which I don't use. Google Voice is similar; no official app but several third-party ones, and WP8 allows apps to integrate into the phone system and to continue calls when backgrounded (this is how Skype works).
Lots of photo editing apps, plus time-of-shot "filters". I have no idea of their quality as a PC is, and always will be, better at that task.
Sadly, custom keyboards are not currently supported at all. The built-in keyboard is excellent, with nice new features like next-word prediction, but it's not customizable or aimed at specific nich users, nor is it (yet) replaceable.
I don't use Twitter, even the integrated functionality. The new version of the Facebook app is excellent, though. It's much faster, has more features, and looks better than the old app.
GoodDayToDie said:
Start screen backgrounds are still not supported. There are pseudo-hacks to do it, using a large array of customized tiles, but there's still black or white behind them. The hacking scene or WP8 has been very limited.
Gmail works fine on WP8, as it did on WP7. There's no official app that I know of, though. Google has no official Music app for the OS, but there are plenty of third party ones (I cannot comment on the quality as I use Pandora and Zune/Xbox Music Pass). There's also Nokia's music app, which I don't use. Google Voice is similar; no official app but several third-party ones, and WP8 allows apps to integrate into the phone system and to continue calls when backgrounded (this is how Skype works).
Lots of photo editing apps, plus time-of-shot "filters". I have no idea of their quality as a PC is, and always will be, better at that task.
Sadly, custom keyboards are not currently supported at all. The built-in keyboard is excellent, with nice new features like next-word prediction, but it's not customizable or aimed at specific nich users, nor is it (yet) replaceable.
I don't use Twitter, even the integrated functionality. The new version of the Facebook app is excellent, though. It's much faster, has more features, and looks better than the old app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the responses. With regards to music, I had a 64gb iPhone 4S and still have an active subscription to iTunes in the Cloud. So I could store most of my music on my phone, and have access to the rest as needed. My One is only 32gb, so I keep some music on it, and the rest I stream via Google Play.
As for Google, does WP8 integrate with Google Voice at all? Or is there at least an app?
With photos, there are some apps from iOS that I truely miss, and haven't seen any alternatives on Android as of yet. I fear my pickings will be even slimmer on WP8.
Does the built in keyboard have anything akin to Swype? I'm fairly certain my girls WP7 does not.
As my girl does have WP7, she can't upgrade to the newest Facebook and is thus stuck with the awful one she currently has.
Thanks again.
As I mentioned, there are apps for streaming music from Google. Nothing official, but the reviews say they work.
There's one app I can find in the store, "Spare Phone", which claims to integrate somewhat (and has the WP8-specific app capability to do so). However, it looks like it can't recieve GV calls directly (forward to your mobile number or take voicemail notifications only) when it's in the background. I'm pretty sure the dev could fix this with enough effort. The app costs $3.49 USD, so I can't easily test if for you. There's no OS-level integration with GV, which doesn't surprise me in the least. Google is Microsoft's biggest competitor in this space...
I have no real idea what the photo app situation is like. There are tons of them, some well-rated, plus some built-in features of the OS. I still prefer to do my photo editing with the power and precision of a PC, though, so I haven't tried. The photos are overcompressed as is (all smartphone photos are), so manipulating them tends to produce artifacts anyhow.
Nothing like Swype, sorry. Microsoft really needs to get with the picture there. It's especially sad/funny, considering that Swype was originally for Windows Mobile and (according to a guy I know who works there) they'd be happy to bring it to WP, but MS hasn't allowed it yet.
Most of my FB on the phone is just done using the built-in integration (People hub, Messaging hub. etc.), but the new WP8 app really is excellent.
1. No you can't set homescreen background. I hope it will be coming in WP Blue update.
2.Gmail works fine, Xbox music is very much better option.
3. WP store is full of lots of photo editing apps, 1020 itself has proshot app. I think you would be very happy in this department.
4.No, unfortunately but you can expect it in updates.
5. Both official apps are very very good. FB just got updated and it's very good. You can also have beta app which updates continuously so FB support from MS is very much active. Official twitter app has everything you want, same as its iOS & Android counter part.
Instagram has 3rd party app instance which is very good, even you can save photo in it. Official Vine app is coming till then 6 sec is available.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Google Voice is handled quite nicely by Metrotalk. It takes some work to get setup properly, but once setup works very seamlessly.
Google has no official apps (aside from a poor Google search app) on Windows Phone, and the only thing known on the horizon is an official YouTube app (a joint project between Microsoft and Google). Otherwise Google has been pretty anti-Windows Phone. If you want the quality and selection of Google apps and services that you find on an Android phone, you simply won't get it anywhere except Android. Windows Phone and even iPhone don't compare to what Google offers on it's own platform. There are third party apps, and some of them are decent.
The Twitter and Facebook apps for WP8 now very closely match the functionality and look/feel of their official counterparts on iOS and Android. They still aren't as awesome, but thankfully, because of the tight OS integration, they aren't necessarily needed as much as you would need them on iOS or Android.
Nothing close to Swype and I'm gonna take a guess and say that it won't be coming anytime soon. There just isn't a demand for it. Clearly there is one here on this site (and other enthusiast sites), but this is a site made up of hardcore tweakers and enthusiasts. In the real world, most people do not know what Swype is and simply don't bother to learn it even if it is available to them. The Windows Phone keyboard is an excellent stock keyboard, and with some of the improvements being seen in Windows 8.1, you can expect it to get better as time goes on.
Almost any kind of configuring, tweaking, or hacking you may be used to on Android goes out the window with Windows Phone 8. For the most part, the operating system just works, so you don't always need it (like iOS), but some people still have that itch to tweak, and if that's you, Windows Phone 8 may not make you happy. But then again, I used to be that type of person, but once I got used to a platform that just worked and didn't need me to go ROM hunting every week, its just became so much better. The operating system is just so much more secure than WP7 or Android, so there isn't much of a development/hacking community for it.
As with any upgrade, new line, or purchase, you should have an opportunity to try it for a bit before you go past the point of no return. So your best bet is to try it as your main driver for a week and see how it works for you.
prjkthack said:
The operating system is just so much more secure than WP7 or Android, so there isn't much of a development/hacking community for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Security, in the context of operating systems or really anything else, is about granting or revoking authorization for access or activity. The key point, there, is "authorization". Authority is a property of ownership. However, I actually have relatively (compared to other OSes) little ability to authorize, *or* revoke authorization for, actions occurring on what is nominally my phone. So, which of the following is true?
A) It's not my phone; it's actually owned by Microsoft, the OEM, and the operator (but mostly Microsoft).
B) The OS is "so much more" locked down than WP7 or Android, and is actually pretty meager on security features.
Did you know that on some Android ROMs, you can do things like prevent apps from making using of certain capabilities while still using the app? That on WP7, you can disable the "Microsoft, may I install or run sideloaded apps?" check that the OS makes periodically without your authorization? Now *that* is an increase in security!
GoodDayToDie said:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Security, in the context of operating systems or really anything else, is about granting or revoking authorization for access or activity. The key point, there, is "authorization". Authority is a property of ownership. However, I actually have relatively (compared to other OSes) little ability to authorize, *or* revoke authorization for, actions occurring on what is nominally my phone. So, which of the following is true?
A) It's not my phone; it's actually owned by Microsoft, the OEM, and the operator (but mostly Microsoft).
B) The OS is "so much more" locked down than WP7 or Android, and is actually pretty meager on security features.
Did you know that on some Android ROMs, you can do things like prevent apps from making using of certain capabilities while still using the app? That on WP7, you can disable the "Microsoft, may I install or run sideloaded apps?" check that the OS makes periodically without your authorization? Now *that* is an increase in security!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whether the product is yours or not does not matter much here. At its base level, all the platforms are "locked down" to a certain extent, some more than others, and what you can do is limited by what the OEMs (Microsoft, Apple, or Google) say you can do. Now you can go ahead and throw hacks at it, tear it apart, or throw money at it to completely change it, but that's going beyond the scope of this discussion. They choose what permissions you may alter or ask for. Finding loopholes to get around permissions or authorization goes beyond what the original manufacturer intended, but its pretty fair to say that its far easier to circumvent security on Android than on any other platform. Android's inherently more "open" platform allows for greater risk at times because it isn't as locked down as iOS or Windows Phone.
That being said, being more locked down inherently offers more security or at the very least, piece of mind, whether that be protection from scripts or hacks, viruses, financial security, or just preventing errors/crashes. Denying or granting access to certain activities, or just flat out not having the option to deny/grant certain activities can be the base for a safer, more reliable, more secure operating environment. "Security" and being "locked down", in some cases, go hand in hand. Of course it can mean many different things to many people.
Now you could also be referring to other "security" features like corporate encryption policies or secure NFC or stuff like that, but that wasn't part of the original discussion, so my use of the word security does not include any of that, but I understand that certainly those types of security features may or may not exist between platforms.
So I have another question.
I've been quite spoiled by 64gb of storage on my 4S combined with iTunes in the Cloud and lately been forced to stream from Play Music due to my One only having 32gb of storage.
Does WP8 have any sort of set up where I upload my music collection to the cloud and can download/stream from there? I do have a 50gb AT&T Locker account, but I'd rather use something that's a little more polished.
OGhoul said:
So I have another question.
I've been quite spoiled by 64gb of storage on my 4S combined with iTunes in the Cloud and lately been forced to stream from Play Music due to my One only having 32gb of storage.
Does WP8 have any sort of set up where I upload my music collection to the cloud and can download/stream from there? I do have a 50gb AT&T Locker account, but I'd rather use something that's a little more polished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you have 7GB of skydrive space for free, can be increased for additional cost.
mcosmin222 said:
Yes, you have 7GB of skydrive space for free, can be increased for additional cost.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have over 60 gigs of music alone.
OGhoul said:
I have over 60 gigs of music alone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt anybody is going to give you 60 gigs of storage for free (ATT does not count, since you pay for it anyway)
There are apps which can stream from Google Music.
Alternatively, get a phone that has a microSD slot; my ATIV S has 80GB of total local storage, never mind the amount I have in my butt.
mcosmin222 said:
I doubt anybody is going to give you 60 gigs of storage for free (ATT does not count, since you pay for it anyway)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iCloud.
OGhoul said:
iCloud.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so then what's the problem?
I mean, you can stream it the same way you did on your HTC one.
But unless you want that camera badly, there is no real reason to get the lumia 1020.
lumia 820 or Ativ S are probably better for you.
mcosmin222 said:
so then what's the problem?
I mean, you can stream it the same way you did on your HTC one.
But unless you want that camera badly, there is no real reason to get the lumia 1020.
lumia 820 or Ativ S are probably better for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The camera is the reason I'm considering a WP. Don't get me wrong, I like the Metro UI. I would usually install a Metro theme on my iPhone when I had it. I'm tremendously underwhelmed with Android and in particular, the camera in my One, which is what prompted my questions.
Basically, if I can get WP8 to do things close to as seamless as they are on iOS, I'd really consider switching. If I'm reading this correctly, SkyDrive offers automatic syncing of photos to my PC from my phone, the way iCloud does?
OGhoul said:
The camera is the reason I'm considering a WP. Don't get me wrong, I like the Metro UI. I would usually install a Metro theme on my iPhone when I had it. I'm tremendously underwhelmed with Android and in particular, the camera in my One, which is what prompted my questions.
Basically, if I can get WP8 to do things close to as seamless as they are on iOS, I'd really consider switching. If I'm reading this correctly, SkyDrive offers automatic syncing of photos to my PC from my phone, the way iCloud does?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes windows phone will upload full res images to skydrive. Great feature actually. BTW have you looked at Xbox music? Its similar to Google play music and iTunes streaming. Take a look, it might be what your looking for: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/music
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Xbox music, Pandora, Nokia Music all work great on my 1020. And something new in WP8, it can sync from your iTunes library. (new WP8 desktop app, no more Zune app like used for WP7)
Did you ever get the 1020 and what were your thoughts?
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk 4
Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
p.nightmare said:
Since chromecast simply get an url or data to play content already "on the cloud", it will be possibile to emulate its behaviour with a chrome extension or something like that?
I'd love to use a chromecast-like interface on my desktop pc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
htcsens2 said:
I'd second that. I'd love to see the ability to chrome cast TO a (widows) chrome browser.
I have a number of MCE PC's connected to HD TV's and computer with monitors throughout the house that would be great as the recipients of "casting".
At work I'd like to be able to look something up on my phone and then sent it to my nearest PC browser...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Jason_V said:
You mean like this? - http://goo.gl/NOoel
You won't be able to push Netflix to the browser the same way, but you can certainly do so with web content.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah kind of like that but completely integrated into he chrome cast infrastructure and APIs so that it is compatible across all apps and is just one click on the new "cast" buttons that are cropping up at the top of all my Android apps now .... (Netflix, Youtube, Google music etc.)
There has been talk of 3rd party hardware makers being encouraged to support the standard so shouldn't be too hard to do proper chrome browser integration as a target.
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
here
p.nightmare said:
I can't believe no one has thought of it yet :fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
dz0ny said:
Here you go github.com/dz0ny/leapcast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Nodecast is also an option
p.nightmare said:
awesome! I will definitely keep an eye on that :good: :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Beside Leapcast (which is implemented in python), there is a JavaScript-/Node.js-Port in Git-Hub available. The port was made by Sebastian Mauer, the guy who wrote Cheapcast.
I spend the last weekend exeperimenting with both Nodecast and Cheapcast. Now Nodecast runs here in a Windows 8.1 virtual machine - and I'm able to stream from other Windows and Android-devices.
I wrote a few tutorials, how to setup Nodecast on Windows (it also possible to use similar steps in Mac OS X or Linux). The tutorial is currently only in German - but Google translate shall do the job.
Nodecast setup for Windows-tutorial: http://goo.gl/2ZU5Mm
Maybe it helps
Leapcast 2.0?
Anyone still working on Leapcast now that the 2.0 SDK came out? Lots of changes like going from DIAL to mDNS for one. Leapcast was very handy for running on a PC that was already connected to the TV. Sadly, all the apps compiled against the newer SDK won't work with it. They won't even discover it as a Chromecast now.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/...oakcolegkcddbk?utm_source=chrome-app-launcher
This was an attempt to do this but I never got it to work on my side.
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calculate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Johny_G said:
Unfortunately, SDK 2.0 requires the Chromecast to calcate key using certificate issued by Google. We will probably wait a long time to see leapcast, CheapCast and NodeCast working again. It might not be even possible at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Averix said:
Not the best news, but thanks Johny for the insight.
If all the rooted ROMs can handle SDK 2.0 and Google's new authentication, there's probably a way to get the emulators up and running with it. Just a matter of time and determination I hope. I wish Google was a bit more open on the software side for the Chromecast. Having the new SDK for sender/receiver apps is great, but allowing companie/people to recreate the piece in the middle would also benefit them I would think. It would be tough for people to beat the Chromecast's price tag, but having other options would be good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't hold my breath. The ROMs get the upgrade essentially "for free" as it's part of the stock ROM code. Maybe the desktop players can take advantage of that, probably not, especially if it's a binary or relying on some kind of TPM or other function in the Chromecast hardware itself.
Having options is good for the consumer, but for a manufacturer, more options = more competition = more mouths to feed = lower margins = more work to keep competitive. One of the reasons Apple is so aggressive about protecting the exclusivity of its platform.
Warning! TL;DR below!
The point is, that every single Chromecast device has its unique ID, its unique MAC Address, and its (unique?) signed certificate. Also, it might have some kind of ID generated when you set the device up (similar to Push ID used in Google Cloud Messaging). Some of those (maybe all of them) have to play together to calculate the key. As soon as you pull the certificate out and put it in different environment, the result of the calculation won't match the SDK's expectations. So there is pretty good chance, that bypassing the key might be completely impossible without modifying the SDK itself (and it would require the developers to actually invest some effort to support these alternatives) and maybe the Chromecast device software as well. But who knows, the guys involved in those "emulators" are way smarter than most of us and might figure something out .
This is the biggest issue. The other one is, that everything has changed in the new SDK/API, and all of the methods used in those emulators are now deprecated and need to be implemented all over again in a different fashion to work with 2.0. This might actually be a good thing, since developers involved in testing of the way-too-rushed 1.0 seemed not to have a lot of kind words to say about it. I have attended one Chromcast block on a local conference, and it was basically 2 hours of swearing.
I've stumbled upon these issues today (and a bit of yesterday), trying to get my app working in the office (I forgot my Chromecast at home - again), and here are some sources if you are more interested in the topic:
https://plus.google.com/+SebastianMauer/posts/83hTniKEDwN
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/29#issuecomment-37288608
https://github.com/dz0ny/leapcast/issues/96
As a developer, I have to say, that Google is making things awfully difficult lately, and the "don't be evil" policy seems to slowly fade away. They put way too much effort into marketing decisions, and have no time to properly test APIs and SDKs before they spit them out . Mostly, when trying some new Android-related technology (to be honest, its mostly Google Play Services technology these days, so AOSP starts to be completely useless), I spend most of the time working around things that nobody thought of (i.e. the Translucency API in KitKat was obviously tailored for Google Now Launcher, and is a huge PITA tu be used elsewhere) and fixing the broken samples that come with them. It might seem weird, but sometimes (say hello to Play Games Services and in-app billing v1+v2!) the sample is inseparable part of the final implementation, so you have to fix their rushed code anyway. I shouldn't be complaining, since things like that raise the value of developers willing to go through all of this in their spare time, but the change of philosophy still bugs me a lot. Google and Android used to be strongly community-oriented, and now the marketing is pulling it all away.
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
Other companies like Roku are planning some DIAL support and I doubt highly they will have a CCast ID and Certificate.
In the end I think we will get something similar to this functionality from a player app like VLC on PC and MAC, or perhaps in Chrome itself.
Cause I think (and I may be totally wrong here) that it isn't the Apps we use that checks the Whitelist and IDs it is the CCast itself that when invoked to load a player app to stream it also checks the whitelist and tests security before it plays.
SO if someone created a program for PC that made the PC announce itself as a DIAL capable device that when connected to loads the app into Chrome, I bet most of it would work.
Might not work with any of the DRM sites like Netflix and Hulu but for things like local content and unprotected streams I see no reason why it wouldn't.
In fact I bet the trouble some are having with Channels in Plex and others would go away because a PC Chrome instance would be able to play many more Transport types than a CCast can currently.
Asphyx said:
Should the goal really be to emulate a Chromecast or should the effort be geared toward supporting DIAL protocol?
I would think the latter is the better option because you could support whatever the hardware supports without the limitations imposed on us from CCast Hardware.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always looked at DIAL as an extension of UPnP and separate from the CCast itself and the Chromecast SDK as not much more than a kit to add DIAL support to Android (and iOS) not meant to build anything on the CCast side at all.
.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. I could actually care less about emulating the specifics of what's in the Chromecast hardware. What I do want is the ability for those unrestricted apps (ie not Netflix) to be able to use their Cast button to find, connect to, and use whatever the emulator is. The new CC SDK doesn't use DIAL to do the initial search any longer. It now uses mDNS. All of the previous apps (YouTube, Pandora, etc.) are still using the old API and DIAL discovery which appears to be backward compatible with the new Chromecast stick software. If you look at the debug logs of the stick, both the v1 and v2 APIs are accounted for. As for Roku, my guess (I haven't started digging in on what they're up to yet) is that they have an app that is using DIAL for discovering the Roku and then just acting as a remote control for all the box functions. Chromecast was a bit more unique since it could basically load up anything from the web as a receiver/playback client since the software is just basically a Chrome browser with some wrappers around it. That's what made it much more dynamic without having to load "channels" in the box within a custom framework like Roku does.
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Averix said:
And Bhiga, as for economics on Google providing the software to other hardware makers, I think it it would actually be in their best interest. The Chromecast right now has to be either close to at cost for them or a loss leader. If they can get the Cast API to become a default standard on new consumer devices, that would help them take over that space. To me, that is such a better proposition for them than trying to get the complexities of something like GoogleTV into TVs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mDNS actually makes discovery a lot easier - mDNS = Bonjour = what Apple and TiVo use for discovery already.
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal. At this stage an Android emulator probably would help adoption, but my point was that a desktop emulator doesn't necessarily add to the rate. If someone starts looking to using a desktop because they think they don't need a Google Cast device, they'll likely runs across Plex and Miracast and may decide they don't need Google Cast at all.
bhiga said:
I agree with you that adoption of the API and protocols is the goal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish Google agreed with us.
Averix said:
I wish Google agreed with us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet anything there are some at Google who do agree with us but when your as BIG a company as Google is it takes forever to get everyone on board and thinking along the same lines enough to manifest it into an end product.
In the end what all if this really tells us is how much DLNA Consortium has failed to standardize Media Distribution by not going far enough and thinking of it from the end user ergonomic experience.
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Asphyx said:
If this discovery and launch capability was more fleshed out in the DLNA specs we might not be talking about DIAL and mDNS right now.
At some point all these protocols (DLNA, UPnP, DIAL) should be merged into one standardized protocol that any platform can use.
Probably years away though...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My concern is that unless Google is willing to push this as a standard rather than just apps for one dongle, it will only be a matter of time before the giant (un)friendly fruit company swoops in and AirPlay becomes the defacto standard that all TV makers, set top makers, and anyone else are forced to build in. It's not quite the same as how DLNA and UPnP have become sort of irrelevant, but it could pan out that way for the Google Cast API without more hardware devices having the capability built in. Time and market pressure will tell I guess.
Does anybody know if it would be possible to write a Google Cast sender application that runs inside a standard web browser just using javascript? Is there anything in the Sender-Receiver communication that could not be implemented using javascript?
(as long as no there is no javascript Cast Sender API available from Google this would mean writing the thing more or less from scratch)
Arne S said:
Does anybody know if it would be possible to write a Google Cast sender application that runs inside a standard web browser just using javascript? Is there anything in the Sender-Receiver communication that could not be implemented using javascript?
(as long as no there is no javascript Cast Sender API available from Google this would mean writing the thing more or less from scratch)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I assume you mean not in chrome. If so then you would need to implement thevram client yourself usung javascript.
I would suggest you look at the fling app. It no longerworks but i beleive it uses a custom client, of course its in java so good luck.
Seems like a lot of effort, what are trying to do?
gottahavit said:
Seems like a lot of effort, what are trying to do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not for me to implement, but if it is possible I'm sure someone will do it since it will mean that you could Google cast from any webpage regardless of browser and OS and without the user installing any software.
I am a hardcore Google user. I have an android phone and tablet and lots of google stuff online. My phone is getting old, and I was thinking of trying out something new.
Couple questions:
1. Whats the equivalent of "rooting" on wp8, if any?
2. How would you go about "rooting" your phone.
3. Are there any recommend phones for general use+development?
Julian90090 said:
I am a hardcore Google user. I have an android phone and tablet and lots of google stuff online. My phone is getting old, and I was thinking of trying out something new.
Couple questions:
1. Whats the equivalent of "rooting" on wp8, if any?
2. How would you go about "rooting" your phone.
3. Are there any recommend phones for general use+development?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. There is no equivalent of rooting at this time, as Windows Phone is much more locked down than Android (comparable to iOS) and there aren't as many devs working on it
2. Nothing yet, but its very easy to developer unlock it to side load custom made apps
3. You are probably best off getting a Nokia, either a cheap (~$100) Lumia 520 or a higher end like the Lumia 920/925/928 (I'd go with the 1020 if you can afford it). Windows Phone is very efficient, and runs almost as well on lower end hardware like the 520 as it does on higher end.
If you are really a hardcore Google user you are likely to find Windows Phone lacking as Google is intentionally keeping their programs and services off the platform (at least first party, nearly everything can be accessed through third party apps).
I made the switch, and I love it, but Windows Phone is not for people that want to constantly tweak everything because it is locked down. I used to love to tinker, now I love that I can't.
Yeah... WP7 was eventually broken wide open, but WP8's lockdown has been harder to bypass. There's a few devices (Huawei W1?) for which people have reported being able to edit the stock ROM somewhat, which is probably usable for "rooting" the phone, but none of the high-end devices have a known working exploit yet.
Developer-unlock, which will allow sideloading low-permission (no special capabilities, just the standard public ones) apps, is available for free, but you have to use PC tools to do it. Get the WP8 SDK from Microsoft (free, but a big download) and run the Windows Phone Developer Registration tool. Unless you pay for a developer account, there will be a very low limit on the number of apps you can sideload.
I'm actually personally pretty happy with the Samsung ATIV S phones; they have the best hardware in many ways (biggest battery, biggest and nearly highest-resolution displays, biggest internal storage that also has an SD card slot, best currently-available-in-WP8 CPUs) and you can install many of the Nokia apps anyhow (you can also install the Samsung apps on Nokia phones, same for HTC, etc.) using a proxy to modify the store requests. However, for a budget phone, the Nokia Lumia 52x line is hard to beat, and for camera quality, the Lumia 1020 is the best smartphone available, bar none.
There's plenty to do if you like to tinker with the phone... the problem is, you have to find it all yourself. There's not that much, aside from things like using a proxy to get apps intended for different OEMs' phones, that we've found to work so far. I've written a neat app that lets you browse the visible parts of the WP8 file system and registry from your PC (see my signature, it's the webserver app) which I hope will help people find something exploitable to get full Admin privileges on the phone, but so far, that hasn't happened. There's lots of other potential exploit vectors too; people just need to find them and make them usable!
Like GoodDayToDie said, it's NOT rootable. End of story.
As an experience goes, though, I switched iOS -> Android earlier this year because I was firmly in camp Google. I seemed to have problems that most other users did not, but all in all it was a miserable experience. After about 4mo switched to WP8.
For reference, on the phone; I use Google Maps, Google Voice, GMail, Contacts, Calendar, and search.
Contacts, Calendar, and mail all sync smoothly with built-in stuff. Search is an app, and it can't take Bing's place on the search button.
There's not an official Google Maps app, but there are apps in the Store that offer it. After about 6w now, I'm mostly using Nokia's Here stuff for mapping though.
Google Voice is available as a third party app. I was using Metrotalk. It was better than GV on iOS but inferior to GV on Android.
For what it's worth.
Except, you know, the part where it's nothing at all like a desktop OS.
No support for arbitrary applications or running as Admin. No file browser or registry editor. No command prompt or built-in scripting engine. No third-party background services (officially, at least; unofficially it's possible if you can work with the low permissions) or multiple windows at once. No task manager or management console. No device manager or third-party drivers. No user installer or recovery tools. No way to uninstall updates or make disk backups. No way to pass a file directly to another application (it must go through a registered extension handler, which the other app must be selected as the handler for). No multi-user support. None of the standard Windows power management tools. No OpenGL support, or ability to manually update the drivers. No support for external mice (or really for any mice, properly speaking). No support for USB host mode (that I can see, at least not in the base OS). No support for Windows networking or VPNs. No (built-in) support for remote desktop. No printing. The included version of Office is very limited compared to the full thing. No way to change the default web browser, email client, or several other such things. No support for installing new system media codecs or fonts. No way to choose what store a certificate is saved into, to export a saved cert, or to delete a saved cert.Browser has a limit of six tabs, no Flashplayer, and no Tracking Protection [Lists] feature.
Windows Phone 8 has about as much to do with Windows 8 as Android has to do with Ubuntu. In fact, it has significantly less, from the user's perspective.
some Noob's experience with WP8/ Nokia 928
Some other problemsthat i have stumbled on while trying WP8 for past 2 days, Nokia 928.
1. Ringtones and txt messages are changeable but notifications sounds for other programs are not (i.e. metrotalk - client)
2. Using public wifi that requires a comfirmatory click on their acceptable use page - Broken - works first time for me, then every time after it constantly loads up "w w w.msftncsi.com/nsci.txt" and the phone is constantly asking if I want to continue connecting to that wifi hotspot - Annoying.
3. Internet explorer is the builtin browser ( with some 3rd party UC browser, Surfcube 3D browser) but NO chrome nor firefox, - some pages load weird, especially if you choose desktop mode.
Images that appears in the browser search in IE 10 or UC browser, using bing or google comes back blurry, until you choose to open that one pic in full size image , but then you can't scroll through the result of images until you go back, at which time the images will sometimes not load, mind you this is on wifi.
4. No native Google voice apps - Metrotalk is good but you have to go through some hoops to setup push notification (ie having the app be able to notify you of txt and voicemail without actually having that app open), and you can't change the notification sound of Metrotalk as stated above
5. No file browsers
As I said, this is my experience with the phone and WP8 for the last 2 days, YMMV
I need a good browser to use with my Fire that allows me to set the homepage (5.1.1, running Nexus ROM). Lightning+ cannot open tabs from apps right now due to a problem with the coding (not exclusive to the Fire), otherwise I'd be using that or Chrome (which doesn't have homeage). Your suggestions?
Edit: To clarify, I don't need to be able to choose my homepage. I just don't want to always restore my browser session every time I open the program.
Pixelguin said:
I need a good browser to use with my Fire that allows me to set the homepage (5.1.1, running Nexus ROM). Lightning+ cannot open tabs from apps right now due to a problem with the coding (not exclusive to the Fire), otherwise I'd be using that or Chrome (which doesn't have homeage). Your suggestions?
Edit: To clarify, I don't need to be able to choose my homepage. I just don't want to always restore my browser session every time I open the program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dolphin?
I'm currently trying Dolphin out but I've heard of privacy concerns; otherwise it has everything I need. Are the privacy issues no longer relevant? The internet does not seem to have come to a consensus on this.
Pixelguin said:
I'm currently trying Dolphin out but I've heard of privacy concerns; otherwise it has everything I need. Are the privacy issues no longer relevant? The internet does not seem to have come to a consensus on this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a bias toward Opera and Opera Mini (depending on need/preference). Same underlying engine as Chrome which yields consistent rendering. Opera Mini has integrated page compression and ad-blocking which is attractive to some. Both offer the option option of customizing the home screen with 'speed dials' of your choosing. Privacy is of no personal concern aside for exercising safe behaviors (independent of browser) and avoiding apps that intentionally mine/leak personal information. That said I think much of the banter surrounding Dolphin (which I have also used; nice browser with some quirks) is pure FUD.
Mx Browser
Sent from my XT687 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Pixelguin said:
I'm currently trying Dolphin out but I've heard of privacy concerns; otherwise it has everything I need. Are the privacy issues no longer relevant? The internet does not seem to have come to a consensus on this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never heard anything regarding privacy with dolphin. It has ads and such, but root and adaway eliminate those. If you're really concerned with privacy on android, don't use android!