Related
Just wondering if the Qualcomm MSM 7200 has ever been shown to take advantage of 3D graphics on ANY device? Isn't there a Samsung out there or something?
On the LG KS20 it has.
Guys
I just got an idea or suggestion or request….. Anyone can please look into the
O2 XDA Orbit II or O2 XDA Stellar clicks the link for specification please….
http://www.gsmarena.com/o2_xda_orbit_ii-2180.php
http://www.gsmarena.com/o2_xda_stellar-2179.php
I think I’m sure it is made my HTC for specific for O2 only…... And it has Qualcomm MSM7200, 400 Mhz processor.
So my question is……. If this phone has ATI video chip and it is comes with the video drivers or not. If yes can we dump the driver from there devices and can we use it with our HTC device…..
Please someone look into this…….
Thanks
The XDA Stellar is a plain old HTC TyTN II (no hardware accelerated graphics).
The XDA Orbit II is an HTC Touch Cruise (same problem as the TyTN II).
donatom3 said:
On the LG KS920 it has.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Search for the LG KS20
juiceppc said:
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad thanks for pointing it out.
juiceppc said:
I think you may have meant LG KS20...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just found this on the KS20 on youtube. Probably doesn't do it justice but wasn't that impressed especially towards the end when he/she it the 'phone' button. Still saw the screen drawing line by line..
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9H8Zcj2Y_sc
Here's the PR hype - if only eh? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiS2RuxUQ-w&feature=related
So...we should beable to get drivers off that once it's released right?
I'm not a developer (at all) but it seems that if you can find a device (the ks20 for example) that uses the same chip and has 3D drivers you should be able to isolate those drivers in that devices firmware. Once you have them all by thier lonesome I don't see why it would take a whole lot of code to patch them into an HTC. It'd be a different story if the device (KS20 again for example) firmware was written to use let's say Symbian as it operating system but since it's using WM6 it should be very similar to what we'd need for our Kaisers or other HTCs. I know it wouldn't be an easy patch but you gotta think that with some of the awesome firmwares that the XDA devs have put out that someone here could do it.
Daemos said:
So...we should beable to get drivers off that once it's released right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's been tried. Chainfire put in over 100 hours into the work but couldn't get the drivers to work on the tytn II
Besides, the 3D-support of the KS20 is not that good. For example, OpenGL ES is accelerated, but GAPI isn't working at all.
I don't know why, but I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset. Why is every device that uses the MSM7200-chipset at least missing one function. For example, the KS20 has it's gps-function disabled. I find that rather strange, since the hardware is in the MSM7200-chipset and the antenna is shared with the normal antenna. So it's just a driver that needs to be added. But, the KS20 has 3D-acceleration, which is unfortunately not very good implemented. This is missing on each MSM7200-device that has it's gps enabled. Could it be that it's impossible to enable all the functions of the MSM7200 at the same time? Maybe the chip just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Ralph Smeets said:
I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, at least you are not alone here.
do qualcomm not publish their errata like intel and amd do?
Ralph Smeets said:
just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bet is that the Kaiser design doesn't pass type approval testing with all functionality enabled. It may be that turning on the hardware acceleration causes RF noise that jams the bluetooth, or the GPS, or causes too many blocked channels in one of the GSM receive bands. If I'm right, there probably won't ever be an "official" software fix released, because usually the fix is at least partially in hardware.
I've seen phones get very close to production before it's realised that major changes and delays, usually a redesign of the pcb, are required to finally fix a problem. Given the rapid turnaround of new designs, it's unlikely they would put any effort into a 'version 2', because the next model would be in design long before the Kaiser was released to production, and they will take any lessons learnt on to that project.
This is all speculation, but based on many years experience as an RF hardware designer, including several mobile handsets.
Ralph Smeets said:
Besides, the 3D-support of the KS20 is not that good. For example, OpenGL ES is accelerated, but GAPI isn't working at all.
I don't know why, but I have the strange feeling that there is something wrong with the MSM7200 chipset. Why is every device that uses the MSM7200-chipset at least missing one function. For example, the KS20 has it's gps-function disabled. I find that rather strange, since the hardware is in the MSM7200-chipset and the antenna is shared with the normal antenna. So it's just a driver that needs to be added. But, the KS20 has 3D-acceleration, which is unfortunately not very good implemented. This is missing on each MSM7200-device that has it's gps enabled. Could it be that it's impossible to enable all the functions of the MSM7200 at the same time? Maybe the chip just runs to hot resulting in strange behavior? Maybe that's the real reason why no device carrying the MSM7200 has all it's functions enabled?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been thinking this all along. What we want is NOT POSSIBLE. Because Qualcomm LIED about the specs of their chipsets. Douchebags.
i highly doubt they lied.
as said, the hardware is probably there to do it, but qualcomm recommends(?) that device manufactures dont enable the whole chipset for whatever reason (heat, battery life, RF interference, reception problems, who knows)
i'd be interested to know whats said to OEM's, but i dont think calling them douchebags is the way forward
sning said:
i highly doubt they lied.
as said, the hardware is probably there to do it, but qualcomm recommends(?) that device manufactures dont enable the whole chipset for whatever reason (heat, battery life, RF interference, reception problems, who knows)
i'd be interested to know whats said to OEM's, but i dont think calling them douchebags is the way forward
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha. Maybe not but I'm pissed. Anyway, if all the specs they claim are not "enabled" on any one phone then we have no "proof" they didn't lie...
Show us a device running that chipset with all the specs they advertise working they way they say it should and I'll shut up.
A co-worker bought a iPod Touch and downloaded some freebie games at work. One of which is a sweet game called "Topple" and is pretty simple.
Here is the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr7DlMhmLrc
Basically you have your classic tetris pieces but they don't fall down until you grab them. The object of the game is to keep stacking. You move the pieces around with your fingers. They each have their own physics so they "topple" and knock each other down. As the stack gets higher so does the skill level, as the entire stack is motion sensitive using the built in G-Sensor. You have to keep the phone up-right at first but as the tower of blocks gets higher the sway gets worse requiring you to place your pieces and offset the lean.
The goal of the levels is to simply reach a certain height, gaining points for placing blocks. Free Play allows you to build your tower as high as you can. In both game types, you can only allow 4 blocks to fall off to its doom.
The game is addicting and funny. Each block has faces which change depending on their action. As the game progresses and your tower starts to lean, their faces do :O
I searched for a while but don't think this is out on any WM device. I know some of you have lots of G-Sensor tetris clones out there and this might be a neat idea to try out.
Very fun and addicting game.
Geebus, I don't have an iPhone, but looking at all the apps--okay, fine--the games it has, it's like going back to 1987 and comparing the 8 bit NES and its beautiful colors (while I'm kicking butt playing Kung Fu and Duck huntin' all the while pretending R.O.B is Johnny 5) to Atari's pong.
There doesn't seem to be many devs coming over to show off their skills--and if they do--well....pong works great on my Fuze...
I'd be more than happy to pay .99 for a nice and fluid "beer" app...with waves and actual liquid motion...
Sad when you have more games developed for an OS that is a couple years old vs a system that has been out for almost a decade.
I'm still saddened that we don't have better emulator support.
What would be nifty is if they had an iPhone emulator much like the Palm emulators out there. The iPhone doesn't have any graphic acceleration (i don't believe). Aside from the variable screen sizes, one would think it would be do-able.
What would be cool is if there was a conversion kit made for the Fuze/TP/Diamond which made the screen a capacitive screen. (Dreaming )
player911 said:
Sad when you have more games developed for an OS that is a couple years old vs a system that has been out for almost a decade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed and I'm still trying to figure that one out. What makes it so hard to develop for WM?
dr g said:
Indeed and I'm still trying to figure that one out. What makes it so hard to develop for WM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Make a WM app store: promblem solved
Just think about how much easier it is to get Apps and games on iPhone rather then WM devices
Yes i own both haha
mastanthony89 said:
Make a WM app store: promblem solved
Just think about how much easier it is to get Apps and games on iPhone rather then WM devices
Yes i own both haha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WM has had plenty of app stores. Handago, etc. Heck Sprint even has a link for an app store which makes it plenty easy. The only problem is, Apple released an SDK that allowed people to make just about anything they wanted and the prices in comparison to the WM apps are waaayy different.
The Apple app store is mostly fun stuff like games and other stuff that's just neat. While, most of the thousands of apps for WM are more business based.
But, IMO it's much easier to download a cab and install it, than the iPhones way of getting apps. Apple, just does such a good job at hyping everything up, that the demand is insane.
I know they have programs to disperse Windows Mobile apps... but it isn't widely known because Microsoft doesn't require EVERYONE to have it like Apple does iTunes (AppStore).
I know they also make a program to install cabs directly to your device when connected through USB (skipping activesync).
Most of the iPhone games look like Flash games that are made into apps. Even the game I posted looks like a flash game.
The AppStore isn't hard to make, but getting it out there is. The best way for a service to get out there would be for a well known Mobile downloading site created a program that used their existing database of programs which allowed installation of demos/trials and a direct method of purchasing retail versions. A site like http://freecabs.org. It has a great database with screen captures and a description, plus all cabs are free to distribute.
The game I posted looks like a simple game that makes use of the gsensor and brings a new twist to tetris-like games.
Windows Mobile will always be suited more towards business while the iPhone has a child-like attractiveness that draws the younger crowd which would gear developers into making programs and games for that class of users.
I'm just sort of "jealous" that a device so new can have so many new games and apps that Windows Mobile doesn't have. It isn't that we can't have these games and apps... just no one has made them. I guess because every iPhone owner can use these games vs only a few people with Touch Pros/Touches/Diamonds/Omnias/etc
i like this topic.. i have/had an iphone but my family now doesnt wanna switch to at&t so i am back with my touch pro typing this on it... i love the ease of the app store.. i mean hell i jailbroke and it had better app distrabution then winmo ... and winmo is a much more open platform.... i think we need an appstore like app with freeware and trial and paid apps on it... you could distrabut it in custom roms because i would put it in mine but idk we need some easier way because im tired of searching google on my phone for a stupid app when it would be so much easier just to have a finger friendly database off a lot of apps and categories and all that good stuff
There are already several "Apple Store" type of products out there. The bad thing is none of them are REQUIRED to get apps so no one really uses them.
Sure the Apple Store is a neat way to find apps... but I just bluetooth the cab file over and install from there.
If your looking for something with descriptions and pics then just about any PocketPC app website will do the job. The only thing different is that they don't install it for you.
Although this thread was on topic of the game Topple... I don't know how it got off topic going from iPhone emulator to Apple Store
[EDIT] Here's what I found doing a simple search: WM App Store = Gecko
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=436127
I rather have an emmulator for iphone Games
You realize what you people ask is next to impossible?
(or are we just daydreaming here and I missed the point?)
Well, again, the thread started around 1 iphone app... but I agree that a "emulator" or a "convertor" would be awesome.
I see lots of PocketPC apps and games get converted to iPhone apps... so why can't it go the other way around.
lots of their games and apps look like Adobe Flash based with G-Sensor support.
NLS-why do you say it is next to impossible. I don't disagree but looking for input.
OK I can tell you a few quick facts.
1) We are NOT sure that iPhone is not accelerated - we just assume because Apple says nothing. All 3D stuff I've seen in iPhone kicks the b*tt of any 3D stuff in WM.
2) The underlying OS in iPhone is (if we believe Apple) a subset of OS X, which as simple as you can make it, it is still a very very complex OS.
3) Multitouch is supported by both OS AND hardware, not a fact in WM... and no you cannot get by without it as many if not all apps do make use of it.
4) WM is not able to emulate really complex devices (and trust me I KNOW about emulation), for example Amiga (PocketUAE attempt SUCKS) or MAME (the last version released was based an a veeeeery old MAME). You have to fight against a non-real-time friendly OS (WM) and a single CPU without real co-processing abilities (and don't tell me about Qualcomm being a quad-core chip because I am laughing).
5) System locks for about EVERYTHING are in place in iPhone (yes even cracked ones) so even a succesful emulator would have VERY hard time tricking the OS that this is a real iPhone platform. Trying to bypass this would be an even greater strain to the already strained system.
...I can go on if needed.
Emulating iPhone with current WM devices is daydreaming.-
NLS said:
OK I can tell you a few quick facts.
1) We are NOT sure that iPhone is not accelerated - we just assume because Apple says nothing. All 3D stuff I've seen in iPhone kicks the b*tt of any 3D stuff in WM.
2) The underlying OS in iPhone is (if we believe Apple) a subset of OS X, which as simple as you can make it, it is still a very very complex OS.
3) Multitouch is supported by both OS AND hardware, not a fact in WM... and no you cannot get by without it as many if not all apps do make use of it.
4) WM is not able to emulate really complex devices (and trust me I KNOW about emulation), for example Amiga (PocketUAE attempt SUCKS) or MAME (the last version released was based an a veeeeery old MAME). You have to fight against a non-real-time friendly OS (WM) and a single CPU without real co-processing abilities (and don't tell me about Qualcomm being a quad-core chip because I am laughing).
5) System locks for about EVERYTHING are in place in iPhone (yes even cracked ones) so even a succesful emulator would have VERY hard time tricking the OS that this is a real iPhone platform. Trying to bypass this would be an even greater strain to the already strained system.
...I can go on if needed.
Emulating iPhone with current WM devices is daydreaming.-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree.. I mean I know enough to know that WM CANNOT handle an iPhone emulator..
I mean If you have ever used an iphone for even 30 minutes your going to realize that it is a lot more complex then windows mobile even if it doesnt look like it.. I mean its hard enough to make good scrolling on apps like iContact, so try and emulate the whole OS..
I just think WinMo needs to be more FUN rather then work
I mean I am 16 years old and I am trying to make WinMo better with my Touch ROM's even though I have a Touch Pro now to work with too.. But I want to make WinMo more for fun as well as work
NLS said:
OK I can tell you a few quick facts.
1) We are NOT sure that iPhone is not accelerated - we just assume because Apple says nothing. All 3D stuff I've seen in iPhone kicks the b*tt of any 3D stuff in WM.
2) The underlying OS in iPhone is (if we believe Apple) a subset of OS X, which as simple as you can make it, it is still a very very complex OS.
3) Multitouch is supported by both OS AND hardware, not a fact in WM... and no you cannot get by without it as many if not all apps do make use of it.
4) WM is not able to emulate really complex devices (and trust me I KNOW about emulation), for example Amiga (PocketUAE attempt SUCKS) or MAME (the last version released was based an a veeeeery old MAME). You have to fight against a non-real-time friendly OS (WM) and a single CPU without real co-processing abilities (and don't tell me about Qualcomm being a quad-core chip because I am laughing).
5) System locks for about EVERYTHING are in place in iPhone (yes even cracked ones) so even a succesful emulator would have VERY hard time tricking the OS that this is a real iPhone platform. Trying to bypass this would be an even greater strain to the already strained system.
...I can go on if needed.
Emulating iPhone with current WM devices is daydreaming.-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are probably right, but I like discussions. My Axim can emulate a PS1. One would think mobile a phone can emulate another phone... at least SOME of its apps. I've read the specs of the phone and while good for a phone... not every app/game is going to require all the resources.
The Multitouch is a bit of a problem though. Even in the game I posted in the first thread, you need multitouch to "spin" your pieces. This would be might cause problems with the touchscreen (the touchpad is multitouch though).
Most of those games look like flash anyway. If they were... could we port them?
Obviously I don't have an iPhone so I wouldn't know. The goal of this thread was to port a specific game... not create an emulator.
dette said:
I agree.. I mean I know enough to know that WM CANNOT handle an iPhone emulator..
I mean If you have ever used an iphone for even 30 minutes your going to realize that it is a lot more complex then windows mobile even if it doesnt look like it.. I mean its hard enough to make good scrolling on apps like iContact, so try and emulate the whole OS..
I just think WinMo needs to be more FUN rather then work
I mean I am 16 years old and I am trying to make WinMo better with my Touch ROM's even though I have a Touch Pro now to work with too.. But I want to make WinMo more for fun as well as work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get insulted but what do you mean by "work" (in the sense that a Touch Pro is needed to do it) when you are 16?
player911 said:
You are probably right, but I like discussions. My Axim can emulate a PS1. One would think mobile a phone can emulate another phone... at least SOME of its apps. I've read the specs of the phone and while good for a phone... not every app/game is going to require all the resources.
The Multitouch is a bit of a problem though. Even in the game I posted in the first thread, you need multitouch to "spin" your pieces. This would be might cause problems with the touchscreen (the touchpad is multitouch though).
Most of those games look like flash anyway. If they were... could we port them?
Obviously I don't have an iPhone so I wouldn't know. The goal of this thread was to port a specific game... not create an emulator.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Port yes. By all means.
First find a way to get in touch with the infamous acceleration that is in Qualcomm chipset.
BTW, iPhone is more complex than PS1.
G-Sensor
I don't think that this app has anything to do with the G sensor, its only using the multitouch function but in WM you can not do this.
mdalacu said:
I don't think that this app has anything to do with the G sensor, its only using the multitouch function but in WM you can not do this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if by app you mean the topple game then yes it uses the g-sensor, you can lean the phone left or right to lean the "tower" of blocks to that side to help it from falling. A little level also appears at the bottom of the screen when you do this.
I also agreeing to an extent about the wm not able to fully emulate iphone. I have an iphone and just about every htc device that has a touch screen but the iphone apps rarely use the multi touch and when they do it can easily be replaced with the buttons we have in a way. For example, the multi touch needed to spin the blocks in topple can easily be replaced with the spinning scroll touch on the touch pro which in actuality be a lot easier than the multi touch cause i can never get the damn block the way i want it when i cover most of the screen/block with my hand trying to spin it with 2 fingers and hold the phone at the same time lol
Also, as far as the security on the iphone apps, its not that complex as made. The apps are in *.ipa format which is just a renamed zip file. Rename it to zip and you can extract the pics used (*.png) and the *nib files (interface builder) with that as a stepping stone, the apps can begin to be ported which is stillnot an easy task, thats why its called a stepping stone
I have seen this:
http://www.sensefly.com/products/swinglet-cam/
and I want one. Trouble is they are $10k!
Got me thinking, I have a number of old GPS enabled smartphones (WM, but I also have my current Android HTC Desire).
It occurred to me that the smartphone has enough power and intelligence to know where it is, and how far off a pre-programmed track it is, and could communicate it's current location via GSM so you could track it on a laptop.
Does anyone out there think that an interface could be built to allow the smartphone to use the error from track to operate the control surfaces of a model aircraft to bring it back on track and to trigger a camera (not the awful in-built ones) to take a pre determined shot?
I have no idea how to programme such a thing, but would be willing to learn if you folk thought this had legs.
I'm sure you could have a program click some shots when its in a predetermined location... just like apps will turn on and off wifi or anything else depending on location.
Having the phone at the same time know exactly what to do with camera would be a lot more code. You'd really have to do some testing to see what would work up that high but I'm sure it could be done.
Not that it's THAT cheap, but much cheaper at $1500. It is a DIY kit so you'll have to be somewhat tech savvy, but this is just as fun if not more fun. Click the link below the vid to get to their site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyYujjP5J-k
makr8100 said:
Not that it's THAT cheap, but much cheaper at $1500. It is a DIY kit so you'll have to be somewhat tech savvy, but this is just as fun if not more fun. Click the link below the vid to get to their site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyYujjP5J-k
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nice, I think it would be possible to make one of these for a lot less than $1500. The thing is, I've kinda got my head into the pilotless device - something that you can set a course and off it goes, does its thing and then comes back. When you think about it, the opportunities for that sort of device (most of them illegal) would be endless.
Thanks for your input folks.
The link I posted does have GPS, although it doesn't seem to have a GPS triggered camera. The creator uses a video camera, and with a high enough quality video camera you should be able to take still image captures. The downside is you'll be stuck with 1920x1080 resolution, which may not be high quality enough for your purposes. I'm sure it would be possible to rig a camera's button to an electrical relay triggered by the GPS unit signaling the correct coordinates.
Hi,
i just flash updated my nexus 4 to support multiuser restricted profiles on my phone.
just found out that windows has a patent for multiuser profiles on phone and we won't be receiving it officially.
so is there any custom ROM development going on to support this feature on the NEXUS 4, if not i want to request it!
(can we do that?? (N00b!):silly
scoupdogg said:
Hi,
i just flash updated my nexus 4 to support multiuser restricted profiles on my phone.
just found out that windows has a patent for multiuser profiles on phone and we won't be receiving it officially.
so is there any custom ROM development going on to support this feature on the NEXUS 4, if not i want to request it!
(can we do that?? (N00b!):silly
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...-phones-offers-hope-for-future-functionality/
oh , and i think Nokia actually owns that patent not Microsoft (Windows is an operating system).
rayiskon said:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...-phones-offers-hope-for-future-functionality/
oh , and i think Nokia actually owns that patent not Microsoft (Windows is an operating system).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess that makes sense.
I don't really see the point of such a feature on a phone anyway. Unless you share your phone with someone, which I highly doubt, considering you own a highend smartphone.
vanmarek said:
I guess that makes sense.
I don't really see the point of such a feature on a phone anyway. Unless you share your phone with someone, which I highly doubt, considering you own a highend smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep nokia, my bad, and this feature might be useful with my friends! (most of them dont have a smartphone so they attack me )
Another stupid patent that should have never been issued, or should no longer apply to modern smart phones. Today's smart phones are not phones, but micro-computers with phone capability. How many computers are not capable of multiple user accounts?
Solutions Etcetera said:
Another stupid patent that should have never been issued, or should no longer apply to modern smart phones. Today's smart phones are not phones, but micro-computers with phone capability. How many computers are not capable of multiple user accounts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol apple ipad!! XD
Hi,
Well, if it makes more sense to activate that setting on a tablet than on a phone, I must say that, almost every time we are in the car for a (even mildly) long trip, the kids ask to play on my phone...
What bothers me is 2 things :
- 1°) they install a lot of things that I do not want as personal use ;
- 2°) they both want to play the same game but can only have 1 for both, so, supposing it's a game to build a village, they play on the others village...
So, even though I understand the reason, I think that multi-user DOES make sense, even on a phone !
Regards.
NexusPenguin
I think there is an app that provide that feature.
You can also download an app to enable multiuser, but you have to use low dpi like 190dpi which make the phone unusable.
The easiest way is to install Paranoid Android which have the feature included.
sent from xda premium app
NexusPenguin said:
even though I understand the reason, I think that multi-user DOES make sense, even on a phone !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not if you get your kids a nexus 7. (c;
I recently bought Chromecast SN:3916...(it is not shipped yed and i may choose )
Which hardware revision is it?
Asking because of i have also available 3916, 3917, 3918, 3B14, 3B15, 3B16, 3B17
Which should I pick to get Armada 1500(hw3.30)?
https://origin-www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/armada-1500-mini/index.jsp
Is root with hardware 3.10 worth more than better chip
http://www.marvell.com.cn/digital-entertainment/assets/armada_1000_pb.pdf
According to wikidevi ""H840 REV 3.xx" is silkscreened on the board"
sources for more info on subject:
http://wikidevi.com/wiki/Google_Chromecast_(H2G2-42)]
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
Clues:
ifixit teardown: SN:3607101ZYGMS HW:3.30
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
anadtech teardown: SN:3626101ZXFCA HW:3.10(pcb looks like from FCC pictures)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7186/google-chromecast-review-an-awesome-35-hdmi-dongle
mathorv said:
I recently bought Chromecast SN:3916...(it is not shipped yed and i may choose )
Which hardware revision is it?
Asking because of i have also available 3916, 3917, 3918, 3B14,3B15,3B16,3B17
Which should I pick to get Armada 1500(hw3.30)?
https://origin-www.marvell.com/digital-entertainment/armada-1500-mini/index.jsp
Is root with hardware 3.10 worth more than better chip
http://www.marvell.com.cn/digital-entertainment/assets/armada_1000_pb.pdf
According to wikidevi ""H840 REV 3.xx" is silkscreened on the board"
sources for more info on subject:
http://wikidevi.com/wiki/Google_Chromecast_(H2G2-42)]
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Chromecast+Teardown/16069
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a chromecast here with serial 36** and it has REV 3.30 printed on the board. All chromecasts should be Rev 3.30, anything earlier was a test or prototype device from my understanding.
ddggttff3 said:
I have a chromecast here with serial 36** and it has REV 3.30 printed on the board. All chromecasts should be Rev 3.30, anything earlier was a test or prototype device from my understanding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another thing to consider, since Chromecast is an appliance type device, even if for whatever reason the next batch started shipping with a SoC platform that was 3x faster, end-users wouldn't see much difference, if any.
It's unlikely Google and the other providers would start making different content available to Chromecasts based on their hardware revision. It would be a support catastrophe for everyone and settings a "you might more if you wait" precedent will kill sales momentum.
Consistency of operation and functionality is the key goal across any hardware revision within the same model. Sometimes that even means underclocking a chip that could perform faster, if for some reason an old chip is replaced with a faster one.
tl;dr: I really wouldn't worry too much about the platform specifics on board revisions unless you're really planning to "dig deep" and do something drastic like heavily modify the OS.
bhiga said:
Another thing to consider, since Chromecast is an appliance type device, even if for whatever reason the next batch started shipping with a SoC platform that was 3x faster, end-users wouldn't see much difference, if any.
It's unlikely Google and the other providers would start making different content available to Chromecasts based on their hardware revision. It would be a support catastrophe for everyone and settings a "you might more if you wait" precedent will kill sales momentum.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but one of the links he posted points to a newer more powerful chipset meant to support 1080P better.
To support those extra features may not actually be too difficult if they just add some code to the Player App that detects highest resolution of the unit when it makes the request.
It wouldn't affect the DIAL protocol at all which is really the sell point here...
Google and Netflix are trying to sell the standard and the device is secondary to that goal. They just needed one device to support it and now they would have zero issues with other OEMs making devices that were DIAL compliant
Better Surround capabilities, Better and Higher resolutions even better net connection capabilities (Full Dual Band N) I can see coming from OEMs in the future, now that may not translate to higher quality NetFlix support but it sure would make the device a lot better on the local streaming side which is good but not great and suggests thats why local took longer to get supported than the others.
I expect to see a lot of devices like Roku and others implement some sort of DIAL support.
And while it may eventually cut into Chromecast sales if the Protocol is widely adopted Google and Netflix will feel like Mission Accomplished.
What we may see is something along the lines of Chromecast Nexus where some 3rd Party makes the hardware and slaps Google's name on it!
Asphyx said:
Yes but one of the links he posted points to a newer more powerful chipset meant to support 1080P better.
To support those extra features may not actually be too difficult if they just add some code to the Player App that detects highest resolution of the unit when it makes the request.
It wouldn't affect the DIAL protocol at all which is really the sell point here...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but it's a poor customer experience when you buy a Acme 9000 and your friend buys an Acme 9000, but your friend's 9000 has a 300-yard range while yours only has a 200-yard range in the same field under the same conditions.
You're right that Google and Netflix are selling the DIAL platform, but the consumer couldn't care less what the platform is, especially for an appliance-type device. They just care that it works, not whether it runs Linux, Windows Embedded, CentOS, or MS-DOS 6.22 It's not a phone or a computer. Nobody asks what OS Smart TVs run - or maybe they do but nobody admits it...
Asphyx said:
I expect to see a lot of devices like Roku and others implement some sort of DIAL support.
And while it may eventually cut into Chromecast sales if the Protocol is widely adopted Google and Netflix will feel like Mission Accomplished.
What we may see is something along the lines of Chromecast Nexus where some 3rd Party makes the hardware and slaps Google's name on it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly - TVs and other devices supporting Google Cast, it's already starting. That's why Google's site mentions "Cast devices" and "Cast SDK" most of the time, mentioning Chromecast only when specifically referring to the Chromecast in particular.
True platform convergence for the multimedia convergence that finally arrived - that would be something! :good:
bhiga said:
Yes, but it's a poor customer experience when you buy a Acme 9000 and your friend buys an Acme 9000, but your friend's 9000 has a 300-yard range while yours only has a 200-yard range in the same field under the same conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get what your saying and your right, but Google essentially just did this with the Nexus 7 tablet didn't they? LOL