Has anyone considered, with the quickly growing list of devices at XDA, to maybe sort them first by operating system and/or manufacturer and/or device type(tablet,smart phone, appliances, TV ect as Android grows)? Obviously OS doesn't work well because devices like the HD2 utilize multiple OSs but what would you guys think about choosing a manufacturer first? Then perhaps choosing a device type or visa versa, then having a list of devices similar to what is seen now on the forum homepage?
Related
Hi,
We've all seen the Windows Phone presentations where the presenter streams the content of the phone on the projector or monitor using some sort of an internal Microsoft tool (as I've come to learn).
Any idea what the tool is? Where one can find it or what would it take to write one?
any answer to this? I need this info as well
Yes I can tell you why its not present on the consumer phones.
This is what I got as an answer to a related question:
The technology used to make this happen is patented and Microsoft is not allowed to distribute it into consumer devices. There are certain devices that are fully open (the devices they use to do the presentations with the TV-out) everything can be taken off those devices and can be added. The consumer devices have some remains of these things (for example in the registry). Only a couple of people own these devices and this technology may not leak for the above mentioned reason, that's why these devices are not widespread amongst developers outside of MS.
Correct me if I'm wrong, this is kind of what I've been told.
Hi guys, is there a clean generic windows phone 7 os? just like desktops were we get a retail os, is there one for phones? and is it flash-able with all phone?
No
No.
It would certainly be interesting to get hold of the OS as Microsoft delivers it to OEMs to begin the process of adapting it to a certain phone model, writing or modifying device drivers, etc., but it seems nothing like that was ever leaked.
WP is closed, as is iOS; for the reasonably open Android there is of course something like a "generic" version; you could even compile and produce one yourself.
There isn't really any such thing as a "clean generic" phone OS, anyhow. Unlike desktop OSes, phone OSes don't ship with support for the massive array of hardware configurations that are found in the wild. Instead, phone OSes rely on a Board Support Package, commonly simply called the firmware, which has the various drivers needed to interface with that specific model's hardware. This is why, for example, even though the source code is available for the Android Open Source Project upon which CyanogenMod is based, it still takes a long time to get fully functional CM ports to each individual device. On things like WP7, where the source code isn't available (except for the kernel and some core libraries), it's even harder.
However, if what you really mean is you want a "clean" ROM that has no carrier customizations in it, there are "open market" ROMs available for many WP7 devices. These ROMs are still specific to the device whose BSP they contain, but are not specific to any mobile operator and usually not to any region.
thanks for the info guys, but it looks like there are no open market roms for the omnia w yet, well, not yet anyway, will keep an eye out now that i know what to look for,
thanks again guys
Answer is yes and no. No oem device created by Microsoft, but there is Nokia. As you know Nokia is part of Microsoft Windows Phone hardware partner. More options etc has Nokia.
Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
I have a passing understanding of various bootstrap schemes used by device manufacturers. This applies especially to Archos generations 5 through 8, Exynos-based devices, and Qualcomm devices. The designs out there are similar in some respects but differ radically in others. I don't know how many designs utilize it, but some schemes have the baseband and application processors segregated. Sometimes they can mingle.
I'm interested in the mobile side of things. Can anyone tell me about network locks and mobile identifiers? I'd like to know things like:
Where that data is stored. (Is it on the same memory chip as the operating system?)
If any of this data is immutable (i.e., burned as fuses).
If this is something that can vary between device models or if they roughly follow the same template.
What Android devices, if any, when hacked are able to pick through this data.
I have wondered this for a very long time
Why isn't there any phone hardware which exists (that I'm aware of) where you can simply install any OS you like without jumping through hoops?
I'm referring to something similar to a PC. When you build a PC, it is all standard hardware and you can load any os you want on it, endless flavors of linux, current or old versions of windows, etc. It is simple. Both windows and linux can generally detect all your hardware and install drivers, it is simple.
With phones however it seems you are always limited. You have to find ways to root them, usually requiring exploiting some vulnerability. Hope the bootloader is unlocked. Assuming you aren't a talented developer (like most typical people), you then must search for roms for the phone, usually made by various people on forums sites or similar. It is a big mess. Or if you don't customize it, your stuck with some bloated os that the manufacturer will fail to update.
I don't understand why phones are such a mess like this, and why you can't just buy an OS-less phone, and simply install vanilla android, or any other standardized open source os on it, similar to how things work on a PC?
There aren't any unified standard in the embedded devices in general and in phones in particular. The reason that you can install compatible OS on the PC is because IBM PC is a standard, which specifies how the PC should boot, where to search for the bootloader, what kind of partition table should be on the HDD, how the devices should be connected, how to probe for the hardware, how software should use hardware, and lots of other things.
In embedded word, there aren't such standard. Until recently, every System-on-Chip used its own boot specifications and bootloaders incompatible with each other. Only in the last 2 years something started to change in a better way.
I am a retired programmer with too much time on my hands; as such, I wrote a complaint to a regulatory body about how I can't install the operating system I want on my device because it will render it unusable (if I can't call for help on a phone because of drivers, what good is it?). I received a response requesting an interview with an officer who specializes in anticompetition cases and I would like to make sure I have my eggs all in one basket.
The current mobile phone market I liken to the desktop OS market of the 90s, where you had companies like Xerox, Microsoft, IBM, and so on; in the 90s, there were antitrust lawsuits where a particular company was accused of intentionally creating barriers to customers seeking to install software by other companies on personal computers. Obviously, that was settled in the 2000s, but IMO it did appear to make a positive change even if we are still fighting against IE. This may not be relevant, but that's what my mind went to when I realized I couldn't uninstall the Play Store.
Nobody uses "cellular telephones" as telephones anymore; instead, they are mobile computers. Computers in the 80s/90s had plenty of OS options (you may recall using OS/2 or BSD), but you can't do that with mobile computers... is that a good thing?
In my retirement, I'd like to develop and build a mobile phone operating system that is not android (nor lineageOS); this would either be Linux or BSD-based with a simple package manager, but the user would have the option to compile their own software also. This would ideally *not* hinder the underlying function of the device (i.e. telephony), but I don't see how manufacturers could be compelled to provide binary drivers. The current mobile market makes it obviously a very high barrier to entry for any who want to develop new operating systems for mobile computers. Is this anticompetitive? Perhaps not, but I'd like to hear some opinions and if you would kindly point me towards some resources I would appreciate it.
IMO the OS is not the problem - a command line based OS can be written by any talented student nowadays - preferably in C++, yes there are enough templates on the Internet, it is the device drivers what have to fit the hardware that make the whole thing difficult. I know that some OEMs put their device drivers' source code to the public.
jwoegerbauer said:
IMO the OS is not the problem - a command line based OS can be written by any talented student nowadays - preferably in C++, yes there are enough templates on the Internet, it is the device drivers what have to fit the hardware that make the whole thing difficult. I know that some OEMs put their device drivers' source code to the public.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To install a new OS on a phone, the phone must first be booted into a bootloader such that the 'image' of the OS can be loaded. The image for the OS should be built with the drivers present such that when booting, the OS kernel can load the relevant drivers as it probes the hardware in the phone, and then the software installed on the user layer can access that hardware through the relevant system calls. How possible is it for the bootloader to load a custom OS in the general sense? The majority of instructions I find are on enthusiast/developer websites with the actual manufacturers giving basically no input (that is to say, I haven't seen on manufacturer's websites or instruction manuals where they give instructions for booting your choice of OS).
Would it be fair to say that mobile developers, like Google/Samsung/LG/Amazon/etc are restricting users from being able to install their own OS on their device? Is driver access a reasonable thing to ask for?
Again, I'm retired, so I have time on my hands, but I'm old and there's realistically not a lot of that time left. I don't want to try developing my own BSD-based mobile OS if there's no way for me to install it on my own devices; that effort could go into another project if it is otherwise wasted. I suppose it is worth asking whether I should bother returning the bureau's request for an interview.