First off let me say that if there is a better place to ask this please let me know!
I want to create a portable android device and I am having a little bit of a hard time understanding what I am looking for/need.
What I am trying to do is create a "wearable phone" per-say. Think of the "Fallout" game's PIP BOY... but for android... and be a phone too (really important for it be a phone).
The ideal thing I'm looking for is a android compatible board that has the ability to be flashed (CDMA) for phone service (Ideally Verizon/Cricket). I would like to not buy a phone and tear it apart and use it... I would have already done that if that's what I wanted to do.
I have seen things like Allgo boards and I have also seen things like BeagleBoard that is android compatible and it has a lot of nice ports like ethernet and usb.
I would like options like bluetooth, wifi, cmda, audio out, low power consumption. Kinda basic things for a phone. It also has to be relatively small.
Some things that would be nice but not needed are options like video out, high capacity storage options (usb flash, sdhc card, or solid state), etc. I would possibly look into dual booting into Linux or Windows CE but thats not nowhere near important right now.
As I said if there is a better place to ask this please let me know! Thank you for your time.
it's hard to find one part at a time. it's also more expensive. it's going to get harder when you build your android OS.
you need to have a team. a big one.
The BeagleBoard and AllGo boards already have android support and kits so that shouldnt be too hard to put together for the android side of things.
I figured the phone would be the hardest part. Is there a way to put the phone part into something like a android device/"mini tablet"?
good. you found the hardware. but as i said: find a team.
you need the hardware to interact with the software (and software to interact with the hardware) more like building an app in android SDK. by that you need a programmer, with experience of building a mobile OS (MIUI is based on android 2.3, they made it from scratch). then make a screen size and a chassis, which is hard because you want it like a large digital watch.
find help in this forum. there are alot of devs you know
Phone + strap + superglue = winning??
Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
hiu115 thank you for your input. what i would really like to know is if there are resources to make it... team or not. I CAN get a team and CAN program if i need to. I am just at a loss for the phone hardware. The android part (hardware/software) is "easy"... the phone additive is illuding. I need a prototype for proof of concept. A lot of my work is done for me it seems.
if i get nothing else out of this thread I would like to know if it is possible to add (for that matter find and buy as well) hardware for the phone part. I would like CDMA. At least tell me if you know what the part name I am looking for is... and where to find it if possible too.
conantroutman you dont get a thanks... funny though... but not helpful ... that IS kinda the point though. (EDIT meh you get a thanks too i guess)
Will be watching this, I once was thinking about doing it, would be awesome, also if you can get hardware to a similar device which is out it would be easier on the sift ware side
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Here are some examples:
linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/LiquidWare-DIY-Android-Modular-Gadget-Platform/
technexion.com/index.php/arm/ti-omap3530/inferno
(just put www in front)
Cheers I will just look
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Ah ha!!! I think I found a better way to ask and get the answer I'm looking for!
What makes a Android device a phone? (Don't say "that fact that it can make calls" I'm looking for the name of the part)
Is there a way to turn an Android device say either custom built or purchased tablet into a phone with like a 3g modem or similar. If so what is that thing I'm looking for!?!?!
I'm not sure if this is of anyhelp, but details of a Qualcom GSM/CDMA chipset
http://www.mobileburn.com/news.jsp?Id=145
Ok... if you want to build a custom android device, the first thing you need is a template... Start with a development board.
The beagleboard is a great board to work with, however it's large and you won't be able to use it other then a tablet on its own....
The KIT-S5PC110 deb board is a good one
People recommend PandaBoard over BeagleBoard as they are basically the same specs but the PandaBoard is dual core.
Here's a link to ARM Dev boards http://www.armdesigner.com/products.html
I do believe that if I were to select a kit for development currently, based on what I've seen out there, I'd go with a originboard. http://www.origenboard.org/
Now, the other thing you will need is to learn some asian language Here in the USA, we are falling behind on mobile technology. You will find more Asian language forums then you will english
Once you have played with the OS a bit, and figured out the specs, you will have a custom circuit board made. Basically for board manufacture, you will simply eliminate all the features you do not want on the dev board to make it smaller. Then you make the board with the remaining hardware. You can probly talk to the Origen guys to get one made. They make their hardware as open as possible, so they will give the specs to the manufacturer of your choosing. This is where it gets costly.
After the board is created, you will build a custom housing for your box. You can prototype these housings on a 3d printer like RepRap or MakerBot... This requires precise CAD drawings. Or you can source it out to someone else.
Finally, build a box and slap a price tag on it.
It's usually a large effort to build a custom android device... However, check this article out from Hackaday.com today: http://hackaday.com/2011/10/10/how-to-build-a-23-android-tablet/
There have been a few fallout builds on hackaday in the past (I'm a daily reader).. http://hackaday.com/2011/09/06/fallout-brought-to-life-with-this-working-pip-boy-3000/
MacaronyMax: thanks that was informative i didnt knwo they could do that
AdamOutler: You seem to know what you are talking about. I do know some Japanese btw but what I really wanted to gain is can a phone module be added to call people from it. I would like to do this without needing internet like wifi connection. I would like to flash it and use a phone number to call people and recieve calls. CDMA would be preffered.
Most of the manufacturers keep cellular technologies locked down. That's the single bit of power they maintain. The rest of the board can be open source, but they lock down the cellular technologies.....
With that said, you can get a "CDMA Cellular Module" for just about any purpose and communicate with it via GPIO(power), UART(Data) and I2C(controls). That would be one way of going about it....
An easier method might be to grab a Samsung Captivate from Ebay, remove the housing and build around what's left. I say Captivate because they are around $200, decently fast, and they are rather slim.... Also, they can be modified to be UnBrickable and we've done alot of research and custom roms in the Captivate Development Forums... an i9000 may be even better, but it's got a larger case... Captivate and i9000 are basically the same phone and some of the most active development forums on the site.
Using a prebuilt device and remanufacturing the case would suit your requirements and possibly be easier I think.
Ok so what I have found are these things called "PCIe minicards" that can do cmda/gsm/gps/wifi and all that good stuff. Is this what your talking about?
If I found a board, that has the slot for it, will this be able to be used for voice calling over say Verizon/Cricket if I added it to my plan? If so would this be flashable with qpst/cdma ws or what would I use to program?
I also noticed some boards having what appears to be the same device (usualy wifi/gps ony) but it looks soldered on. Might replacing one of those for one with cdma capabilities work? (I think i saw this on a new pandaboard)
The reasons I dont want to use a pre-exiisting phone is because 1) I dont get to learn anything 2) I can't "upgrade" anything and 3)I don't want limitations set by manufacturer (ie. phone needing root, etc)... plus I kinda like the from-scratch look of things.
Related
I was just wondering whether anything was happening regarding Android on the Palm Pre mobile phones?
There are plenty of people asking, but has anyone started the project? It's already coming to the TouchPad, so will anyone be making Android for it?
Thanks and sorry if this is in the wrong place.
it is 100% completely and utterly possible.
It's a relatively small task to undertake, but nobody has a pre 3 unfortunately. They sold out before a price cut in the hope that people would get refunds, and they did.
I'm buying an HP Pre 3 as we speak, and I'll be trying to learn how to port and develop ASAP, but it will be a huge undertaking for me, as I'm only 16 and I'm busy with A-Levels and **** like that associated with school. Don't count on anything from me though, I might not be even able to get my head round all this computer speak... (I bet my brother '£30 + a slap' that I'd become a recognized developer one day, so I really want to do it, I just don't know if I have the time.)
I'm not very literate when it comes to android, but I know how it works (I run an old HTC Hero GSM and have seen and helped with about 12098201 billion ports) so I could get it done. Just be patient. I really hope someone beats me to the punch though, cos if it's left to me I couldn't deal with the pressure...
Please don't thank any of my posts by the way, I don't want to be that guy who talks alot and gets nothing done, but still gets credit for stuff.
ehh ignore my ramblings if you want, just know that, one way or another, there will be a port of android to the Pre 3 some day.
Great news !
I could do some tests for you if you need it since I own a Pre 3.
Actually, the Pre 3 hardware is really good but I miss the Android Market and its apps...
the pre 2 has the came processor as the droid x so wouldnt that make an android port easier?
n anything from me though, I might not be even able to get my head round all this computer speak... (I bet my brother '£30 + a slap' that I'd become a recognized developer one day, so I really want to do it, I just don't know if I have the time.)
I'm not very literate when it comes to android, but I know how it works (I run an old HTC Hero GSM and have seen and helped with about 12098201 billion ports) so I could get it done. Just be patient. I really hope someone beats me to the punch though, cos if it's left to me I couldn't deal with the pressure...
can we get a legitamate resonce for this please...ICS will be out soon and i want to see how it is.
This would be a dream to me.
any takers? i dont wanna have to get a new phone already after buying this pre 2 -___-
Yesterday I backed up everything on both my Touchpad and my Pre3 (Veer I put on a separate palm account and Isync'd everything via google). Today I put android a3 on my Touchpad (as a hedge against full blown demise of webOS ...I have deplored the failure of the backup server of late as a possible sign of that sorry end). Now, at least, I know it will have a life in a webOSless world. I would love to see it go on my Pre3 as well to be somewhat secure (Pre3 cost me more than Touchpad). I note with interest the openings that "seem" to be for future microSD and/or SIM and will watch the secondary market offering these items and others (i.e. replacement batteries, parts) for DIY if the thing gets a new lease on life.
Is it just me, or does it seem that the fragmentation of android has finally cost the android rom development community. Many phones have very little development while many developers are jumping ship the first chance they get to move to something like the Samsung nexus. This leaves many android users with limited options and the ability to see what this proud community can do.
There are phones out here that have unlocked bootloaders but yet they still receive very little development. I dont understand that as I've seen a lot of developers complain about locked bootloaders but yet when they move on to a new phone, they don't support some of the phones with an unlocked bootloader.
I understand as more androids hit the market that it will dilute rom development some, but it's grown into something similar to certain phones have developers gathering to them the way apple fanboys gather to iPhone. I'm disappointed in that as I always thought of android as being the anti apple.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using XDA App
Care to give some examples? We're still seeing ROM releases for the G1, even.
The LG revolution is one example. Unlocked bootloader and not too much development.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using XDA App
Guys please understand that this site was built in the believe that if you wanted something for your device then dig in and make it. Only developer you can relay on is the one on the other end of your keyboard.
The knowledge is out there. Don't relay on someone else do make something for your device. That will only lead to disappointment.
How do you think most of us got started?
People are only going to develop for devices they own, which means devices that they like and more often than not they are the same devices which are most popular over-all.
If dev support is what you want then choosing the device with the most support should be part of your decision making process when buying a new phone. If you buy one with little support it's on you!
lol idiots and android fragmentation. Stop speaking of it. Some ****er said something about android fragmentation and the noobs are talking about that without reading any articles, without searching themselves etc etc. There's no such thing. And just because the app drawer icon and the notification bar are placed in different placed on Tablets, doesn't mean the platform is fragmented.
Personally I would love to learn how to do something like porting my own roms onto devices, but of course I would have to be a skilled programmer. Just as a general question, how hard is it to create your own rom for a new device? Do have to do a lot of coding from scratch, or do you just sorta copy and paste a lot of stuff already out there?
Middle East Guy said:
Personally I would love to learn how to do something like porting my own roms onto devices, but of course I would have to be a skilled programmer. Just as a general question, how hard is it to create your own rom for a new device? Do have to do a lot of coding from scratch, or do you just sorta copy and paste a lot of stuff already out there?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd also like to know this. What would it take to port something like CM9 (something where the majority of the actually ROM is made by proper devs), and port it to something like the Razr dev edition (a device I know won't get any love from the community but should actually be relatively easy to develop on)? What would someone with zero coding experience actually be able to do if they had the phone, the sdk and access to CM's GitHub?
You would most likely start with CM7 and use your stock roms kernel, replacing the userland. By far the hardest part about doing a port is getting a kernel, once you have a kernel that boots the rest is mostly tweaking build props.
Simple solution. If development is that important to you, check out the forum for the device before purchase. And actually support the devs for your device.
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using xda premium
Konstantinos said:
lol idiots and android fragmentation. Stop speaking of it. Some ****er said something about android fragmentation and the noobs are talking about that without reading any articles, without searching themselves etc etc. There's no such thing. And just because the app drawer icon and the notification bar are placed in different placed on Tablets, doesn't mean the platform is fragmented.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe CNET coined this in regards to Android. I saw an interview with one of the CNET "yackers" and Androids big cheese.
Konstantinos said:
lol idiots and android fragmentation. Stop speaking of it. Some ****er said something about android fragmentation and the noobs are talking about that without reading any articles, without searching themselves etc etc. There's no such thing. And just because the app drawer icon and the notification bar are placed in different placed on Tablets, doesn't mean the platform is fragmented.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I certainly agree that "fragmentation" is used too often as a buzz-word to show the instability of Android OS. This use is really misleading. IMO fragmentation does exist in the Android OS, though, in that there are still iterations of Donut and Eclair in usable devices alongside Froyo, GB and the newer, each having it's own device/manufacturer -specific user interface as well.
Seems to me that they all do pretty much the same thing, tho. The Android core (Linux-based, right?) is the software foundation that allows the hardware drivers to work together to do the same thing device to device: make phone calls, access the internet, and play games. (Ok ... run apps)
Since the aOS core is fairly similar across devices, the bigger "fragmentation" comes from the hardware. As hardware changes, the driver support changes as well, and may become obsolete, therefore negating any upgrade options. So, if your device used a video chip from some Asian company that was destroyed in a typhoon, for example, you might never see another driver made, and also never see an upgrade to the next letter of Android.
Fits with what others have said: If you want to upgrade the OS later, either choose a very popular device, or at least one with very common parts.
Even then, there's no guarantee.
I was an iOS user for 3 years. I hacked the hell out of it. Now its been over a month I am a Galaxy Nexus user and I hack the hell out of it too, (still learning tho...) and I love it. Having said that, and having deep knowledge of both platforms, I DO believe that there is fragmentation in the Android platform.
The next step, is each one of us to think for himself what does he mean exactly by saying fragmentation. After we establish a common base, so that we all speak the same language we can continue.
My opinion is that not only there is fragmentation, but it comes in different fields. There is fragmentation in the Android versions still used, there is fragmentation in the UI,there is fragmentation in hardware, software and pretty much everywhere. Why today there are so many versions of Android apps that are still not compatible with ICS. Lazy developers? I dont know. What I do know is that if I was in iOS most of the Apps would got updated before the next version got released...
Anyway I really do not want to start a flame war. I absolutely love my Galaxy Nexus and I will continue to hack it. I also love Android 4.0. But saying whats wrong with what we like is the only way it will get better. By denying it it will only get worse. Is there a possibility I am wrong? Of course. But nevertheless, this is my opinion and I am expressing it.
My biggest gripe with Android is the inconsistency with the UI,which really degrades the experience compared to iOS. Since Google has no review process for apps I find that most Android apps are ugly compared to iOS and since the developers aren't forced to adhere to any UI guidelines there's zero consistency across the board. IMO Google really needs to be a little more evil when it comes to Android otherwise they will be in big trouble once WP7/8 gain traction,which is just a matter of time. I've used every mobile OS out there and to me Android has by far the worst user experience due to inconsistent performance,abysmal battery life and the aforementioned UI inconsistencies.
Fragmentation is exsistent. My little brother bought the LG Marquee as I told him, since the specs are similar to my galaxy S Epic 4G. Despite that, the release hasn't brought much attention since it wasn't well advertised and it paled in comparison to the Epic 4G touch being released. Even apps are fragmented, not over android version I.e. froYo, gingerbread. But over the phones themselves, since the LG marquee has a different GPU than my phone, many 3d games are similar incompatible, despite it being run by a 1ghz processor. And yes the resolution on both phones is the same. It's the only thing I don't like about android, apps take forever to update to support all platforms of hardware and software, while iOS is all the same across the board making updates faster and easier.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
i thought this was common sense
when i wanted to buy a new android i wanted a phone that had a big following in the community
first was the nexus line
then HTC
then samsung
i went with Samsung since it was the smoothest one out there
and then it became the the most popular phone on XDA
Konstantinos said:
lol idiots and android fragmentation. Stop speaking of it. Some ****er said something about android fragmentation and the noobs are talking about that without reading any articles, without searching themselves etc etc. There's no such thing. And just because the app drawer icon and the notification bar are placed in different placed on Tablets, doesn't mean the platform is fragmented.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word. Fragmentation isn't the problem... the problem is that every device needs a rom tailored specifically to it, and installing the wrong rom can brick your phone.
Sent from my Hercules using XDA App
fucxms said:
Care to give some examples? We're still seeing ROM releases for the G1, even.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skyrocket.
Sure, there are a few ROMs/devs there (seanzscreams is a phenomenal guy). Cyanogenmod? Nothing. MIUI? Nothing. ICS? Nothing. Any word on any of these being available on the Skyrocket? No, with the exception that Samsung will provide and ICS kernel for the Skyrocket eventually. Will there be any ICS ROMs developed for the Skyrocket then? Who knows.
Isn't that basically supporting the notion that Android is "fragmented" on some level, in some area? That you need to custom tailor roms individually to meet the needs of each device (due to drivers, hardware, whatever) under the encompassing umbrella that is Android. Is that not a form of fragmentation? Maybe one that doesn't bother you at all, which is understandable, but has certainly ruffled the feathers of other users?
Aside from that I agree with other elements of fragmentation that members have posted about here sso far. Frag in UI is one that particularly irks me the most.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
How can people say fragmentation is not a problem? Or worse, that it doesn't exist?
I suppose this is why Google is allowed to continue this charade of an open OS.
Sent from my SGH-I897
...of the year 2015.
moderators: I'm very sorry (not really) for the sarcastic spam, but I've grown more and more unhappy with Samsung in regards to them keeping their promises. At this point, other than my P6210 tablet, I've sold every single one of my android devices that are controlled by samsung.
I still have a galaxy nexus, but thankfully the source for that is controlled by google - not samsung.
Q1 has come and gone. No ICS. Hell, they STILL won't release the source for the damn wifi driver! The same source that qualcomm (who owns atheros) released under the GPL, but samsung says that they (samsung) get to choose between GPL and BSD and they are choosing BSD. Why? What good does it do Samsung to NOT release the source? If Apple.. er.. samsung wants to treat their customers this way, I can take my future business elsewhere.
If I wanted a closed platform, I'd buy an iphone or ipad.
Gary
I agree
And I feel that with the increasingly number of similar tablets that Samsung puts in the market, the hopes for further updates are extremely low. Maybe we will have a first revision of ICS, but better it is good, because I don't think they will fix whatever is wrong.
I will agree with Gary in terms of how closed Samsung is making their "open" device. Though that is coming from a developer. From a consumer perspective having or not having ICS makes no difference to them. Unfortunately as our world becomes more tech illiterate the more these devices will become more and more locked down and cause stagnation in innovation.
Sorry to hear you leaving though you were a great help here.
I'm not leaving the p6210... its the only samsung device I'm keeping. However, until and unless Samsung gives me something more than incomplete and outdated source, there's nothing else for me to do. I can't fix the wifi bugs, because Apple..er..Samsung won't release the source.
If they ever get around to pushing out ICS (big "if" there) AND they release the source, I'll play with that. I might even find the time to just port AOSP (or even better - AOKP) over.
After using a galaxy nexus for a few days, I don't miss touchwiz at all.
Well that's good to hear... It sounded as if you were leaving us there. Though supposedly someone is making headway with wifi with the cm9 ics build. You might want to check in there.
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
Even Huawei Springboard (my 2nd tablet) already received ICS, I also disappointed a bigger company like Samsung get update slower then Huawei
Sent from my GT-P6200 using XDA App
fewt said:
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GPL is not a driver, GPL is a open source licence.
Yes, I know the difference between GPL & BSD (both are OSS licenses.) I was asking if the GPL version would work if it was updated with the p6210 WIFI PCI ID.
Sent from my GT-P6210 using Tapatalk 2
fewt said:
What's with the driver? Does the GPL driver not support our cards, is it just missing the pci id? I'm new to this slate, so I don't have much exposure to the current issues like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For doing an AOSP type implementation where 100% of the source is available, yes - it might.
For trying to do a kernel that would work with the rest of the samsung firmware, no - it won't. There are 3 parts that have to work together here: the actual driver (ar6003.ko in samsung's firmware), wpa_supplicant (which, on stock p6210 implementations has a ar6003 specific interface compiled in) and the rest of the firmware (settings page, etc.)
The "rest of the firmware" calls wpa_supplicant to do the dirty work of the wifi driver, and wpa_supplicant makes calls directly into the driver.
I'm sure I typed all this before, in another thread months ago, and went into great detail. The short version is this:
I need the source for the ar6003 driver and the source for wpa_supplicant (for the ar6003 interface.) Both of these are released in "GPL/BSD" dual licenses by their authors, meaning that samsung can, in theory, choose which license model to use when they include that code. Samsung has told me that they are claiming BSD for both and therefore will refuse to release the source to any modifications that might be included.
I've tried pulling in the generic ar600x code from mainline linux, but it wasn't working for me with the rest of the samsung stuff... and I simply don't have the time to mess with that for endless hours just because samsung is trying to be apple-like and make android a closed platform.
garyd9 said:
For doing an AOSP type implementation where 100% of the source is available, yes - it might.
For trying to do a kernel that would work with the rest of the samsung firmware, no - it won't. There are 3 parts that have to work together here: the actual driver (ar6003.ko in samsung's firmware), wpa_supplicant (which, on stock p6210 implementations has a ar6003 specific interface compiled in) and the rest of the firmware (settings page, etc.)
The "rest of the firmware" calls wpa_supplicant to do the dirty work of the wifi driver, and wpa_supplicant makes calls directly into the driver.
I'm sure I typed all this before, in another thread months ago, and went into great detail. The short version is this:
I need the source for the ar6003 driver and the source for wpa_supplicant (for the ar6003 interface.) Both of these are released in "GPL/BSD" dual licenses by their authors, meaning that samsung can, in theory, choose which license model to use when they include that code. Samsung has told me that they are claiming BSD for both and therefore will refuse to release the source to any modifications that might be included.
I've tried pulling in the generic ar600x code from mainline linux, but it wasn't working for me with the rest of the samsung stuff... and I simply don't have the time to mess with that for endless hours just because samsung is trying to be apple-like and make android a closed platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wpa_supplicant is what's probably killing you if it has been forked, more so than the driver itself. Makes perfect sense why it is such a pain.
Do you know of a thread somewhere that describes how to get started building kernels for these things? I'll play around with it, I don't have much experience with Android outside of some hacking with adb but I know my way around Linux as well as most.
I'll start poking around more, but thanks for the short version it is appreciated.
Zadeis said:
I will agree with Gary in terms of how closed Samsung is making their "open" device. Though that is coming from a developer. From a consumer perspective having or not having ICS makes no difference to them. Unfortunately as our world becomes more tech illiterate the more these devices will become more and more locked down and cause stagnation in innovation.
Sorry to hear you leaving though you were a great help here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree that consumers don't care. Call me naive that I didn't scour the internet deep enough to find good, honest feedback, but the only reason I chose the more expensive Samsung 7.0 was its IR blaster and its advertised ability to control the home theater components with it. That feature is bolded and blaster all over Samsungs feature list and descriptions.
So I get me GT7+ 2 months ago and how does it work? It doesn't do what I want. Peel, the only IR app available for the tablet force closes every time, and updates have proven fruitless. I email the developers of Peel and what do they tell me? They won't fix (or can't fix) the problem until they get updated ICS drivers for the SG7+. So for now I am **** out of luck until Samsung updates. I try to get a hold of Samsung tech support and get nowhere. The best I got was from a "Live Chat" bot that said ICS will be available in the future. No more specifics could be given.
And to add insult to injury, the screen on my Tab is fritzing out and needs to be sent back for service already. On paper the SG7+ looks great but for me it's been nothing but a hassle.
I want ICS so I can have everything work as advertised. It probably never will so I'll chalk this one up to experience and sell the POS.
Just remember that samsung never actually promised ICS for this device. There were "leaks" (completely unofficial) and "targets", but never any legally binding promises.
Why should samsung spend the money developing ICS for people who own a device when that device is ALREADY 6 months old? At the rate samsung is coming out with new devices, they need that money developing for newer devices.
In a sick kind of way, this makes sense to me. (Samsung seems to be forgetting, however, that I buy a new tablet every 6-12 months and my next one will NOT be a samsung device due to the experience I'm having with them over this one.)
What doesn't make sense to me is the way that they are withholding source code. It just doesn't profit them or even save them money. There isn't even anything proprietary in the ar6003 drivers and wpa_supplicant code. No trade secrets. It's almost as if they are deliberately chasing AWAY technical people... but that just doesn't make sense when your primary OS is an open one that depends on geeks.
The only thing I can figure out is that they are, in fact, hiding something. Perhaps they are embarassed about the programming? Perhaps they cut corners and don't want it to become public knowledge? Maybe they just have a nasty streak and are deliberately trying to prevent any repeat customers. I'm just taking wild guesses here - I honestly don't know.
The flip side to that is that you are aware of the fact ICS will have an impact to functionality on a current situation. Most people won't, as you put it, scour the internet to find the solution or future solution, to a problem and actually understand that an OS update will have a great impact on their experience with their current product. I had a discussion with someone the other day on this mindset and how it has been driving me nuts. (This person also considers them self an average user and not like most of us on this forum) You know that android 3.2 is on your your Tablet. YOU know what android 4.0 ICS is and how it impacts you. Most don't. That is what I was trying to conveying.
Though I am surprised that you are having issues with it on account I have had no problems with it (even though I haven't used it much).
P.S. Sorry about the irritated tone I do not mean any harm it's just a sore subject with me :/
Zadeis said:
The flip side to that is that you are aware of the fact ICS will have an impact to functionality on a current situation. Most people won't, as you put it, scour the internet to find the solution or future solution, to a problem and actually understand that an OS update will have a great impact on their experience with their current product. I had a discussion with someone the other day on this mindset and how it has been driving me nuts. (This person also considers them self an average user and not like most of us on this forum) You know that android 3.2 is on your your Tablet. YOU know what android 4.0 ICS is and how it impacts you. Most don't. That is what I was trying to conveying.
Though I am surprised that you are having issues with it on account I have had no problems with it (even though I haven't used it much).
P.S. Sorry about the irritated tone I do not mean any harm it's just a sore subject with me :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest release od Peel finally has it working on such a basic level that's it is no more useful that the remoate that shipped with my television. It can tuen my TV on & off, it can change channels, and it can adjust the volume of the television. When I want to add another device such as a cable box or AV receiver? No go. It will power the device in setup but it will not save it to the application for future use. I blame buggy peel software. It can obviously fire the codes it needs but they're going to blame Samsung and say it's a driver issue. The only way I could believe that possible is if the radio frequencies vthe two devices used were too close together to be discerened by the GT7+. Regardless, it's a feature which does not work as it explicitly advertises and, as Gary points out multiple times, they refuse to release the source code so crafty & eager developers (which I am not) can make their own functional software.
Peel doesn't use RF... it fires the infrared emitter on the device. I actually played with the "peel" software once. For about 10 minutes. I found it a complete joke and froze the software. I never really cared much about that aspect of the tablet. To me, its for reading ebooks, playing games, and "tinkering." Okay, more for tinkering - but don't tell my wife that. She already yells at me about how expensive my toys are.
garyd9 said:
Peel doesn't use RF... it fires the infrared emitter on the device. I actually played with the "peel" software once. For about 10 minutes. I found it a complete joke and froze the software. I never really cared much about that aspect of the tablet. To me, its for reading ebooks, playing games, and "tinkering." Okay, more for tinkering - but don't tell my wife that. She already yells at me about how expensive my toys are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought this Tab for the exact same reasons, I was actually going to get the Kindle Fire as all I really wanted was an e-reader, but the IR Blaster changed my mind. I set up Peel for my home theater and used it once than decided my universal remote for my dish actually works better and haven't used it since. I came in knowing from reading teh threads that Samsung wasn't the greatest at support or putting out updates but all I wanted really was the ability to root it to remove bloatware. IMO HTC devices are much better and easier to customize as HTC is more open about sharing the source code and also provide their own program to unlock their devices. But they at one time were as tight fisted as Samsung and getting updates out of them is still excruciatingly slow. Hopefully Verizon will be getting a One X device soon as I'm up for an upgrade in July and right now the best HTC device they have is the Rezound.
fcorona76 said:
The latest release od Peel finally has it working on such a basic level that's it is no more useful that the remoate that shipped with my television. It can tuen my TV on & off, it can change channels, and it can adjust the volume of the television. When I want to add another device such as a cable box or AV receiver? No go. It will power the device in setup but it will not save it to the application for future use. I blame buggy peel software. It can obviously fire the codes it needs but they're going to blame Samsung and say it's a driver issue. The only way I could believe that possible is if the radio frequencies vthe two devices used were too close together to be discerened by the GT7+. Regardless, it's a feature which does not work as it explicitly advertises and, as Gary points out multiple times, they refuse to release the source code so crafty & eager developers (which I am not) can make their own functional software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would Peel blame Samsung? From what you described, the hardware is working properly but the functionality to save multiple devices is missing in software.
I think this is what Zadeis is trying to get at with regards to expectations - Peel sounds like it's either broken or not designed to meet your expectations. Either way, it's not something that's going to be addressed by an ICS update.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that the GT7+ doesn't work as advertised. But the proper course of action here is to seek remedy with Samsung, not wait for a software update. When you get a bad meal at a restaurant, you send it back. You don't eat it, then hope dessert will be better.
Apologies if my tone comes off as harsh or unsympathetic, I do not intend to be either, but pinning too many hopes on to an OS update is just setting yourself up for more frustration down the road when it doesn't match your expectations.
---------- Post added at 06:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------
garyd9 said:
What doesn't make sense to me is the way that they are withholding source code. It just doesn't profit them or even save them money. There isn't even anything proprietary in the ar6003 drivers and wpa_supplicant code. No trade secrets. It's almost as if they are deliberately chasing AWAY technical people... but that just doesn't make sense when your primary OS is an open one that depends on geeks.
The only thing I can figure out is that they are, in fact, hiding something. Perhaps they are embarassed about the programming? Perhaps they cut corners and don't want it to become public knowledge? Maybe they just have a nasty streak and are deliberately trying to prevent any repeat customers. I'm just taking wild guesses here - I honestly don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you already answered this question in what you meant as a joke earlier... Apple.
Samsung makes Apple's SoCs. GT7+ uses Samsung's own Exynos SoC. I think chances are good that Exynos and the A5 share IP and therefore, Samsung might be withholding the source code because the modifications they've made include IP that is covered by whatever NDA exists between Apple and Samsung.
so what is the latest news on ics update for the 6210 ? , guessing samsung said no ics love for us ? , or .... just wondering what latest news is ..
h2g2 said:
Samsung makes Apple's SoCs. GT7+ uses Samsung's own Exynos SoC. I think chances are good that Exynos and the A5 share IP and therefore, Samsung might be withholding the source code because the modifications they've made include IP that is covered by whatever NDA exists between Apple and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are a bit confused, I think. The exynos isn't the problem. While samsung hasn't exactly given us full technical documents on it, they added support for it in the mainline linux kernel - publishing enough source. They pretty much HAD to do that, as CPU support in linux can't be done as a module, and therefore must be opensourced in order to run linux at all.
The issue, at least in the case of the 7+, is the wifi chip/driver. It's an atheros 6003 chip. Qualcomm (who owns atheros) released the driver for that under the GPL. Samsung has claimed to me that they (samsung) are licensing it from Atheros under terms that allow them to choose to re-release the driver under either GPL or BSD terms and that they (samsung) are choosing the BSD model (which doesn't require the release of source.) In theory, Qualcomm could FORCE samsung to release the source, but I doubt qualcomm really cares too much. In fact, the module itself as released in binary form in the 7+ firmware (at least up to LA1) actually claims GPL licensing. (Can be verified by using modinfo on ar6000.ko) However, only the copyright holder can enforce the licensing.
A nearly identical situation exists with wpa_supplicant and the intergration between ar6003 and wpa_supplicant. In that case, I know for a fact that the author allows either GPL or BSD terms so wouldn't force the issue.
Those are the only two things I, personally, care about right now. If I had the source for those two parts, I'd be able to not only FIX the wifi issues on the p6210, but also enchance the functionality. I'm also unable to make certain unrelated changes to the kernel, as doing so without being able to recompile the ar6003 driver will render the existing ar6003 non-functional.
Buyer of the blaze here, after i turned in my Amaze 4g due to battery problems (even with a custom rom, it was literally dead after 5pm, with nothing but heavy talking and minor web use), i honestly love this phone. It's snappier, has an AMAZING battery for a smartphone, and basically easier to hold in my hand.
The question i do have, though, is why isn't this phone getting any development compared to similar phones like the S2 and the blaze? like the others, its pretty futureproof, and as fast, if not faster than them. Does it have a locked bootloader? Did samsung do something to make it hard to root? Does the recovery not work? seriously whats up with this lack of dev support?
Basically i just want an ICS rom to remove the damn bloatware and make the battery last even longer. I know samsung is coming out with ICS, but knowing their track record, it could take months before we get it, and even worse, contain the same bloat as it has now.
tl;dr why are there no roms or devs working on this phone?
No Samsung phone comes with a locked bootloader, and root has already been achieved. This phone is considered mid range even though it's a baby sgs2 that's why I think most devs aren't knocking at our door because there are higher end phones out now and in a couple weeks. We should be seeing ports or something. The phone is relatively still new as well.
Sent from my SGH-T769 using XDA Premium App
Here's a thought, maybe because they aren't paid to?
I gotta say, the android community clashing with the traditional linux OSS community is an interesting thing to watch. In the linux world you wouldn't see so much sense of entitlement as you see with android devices. I guess that's because with a linux install, the community is still more full of tech minded people than it is of novices. With android, it's been thrust into the hands of the unsuspecting consumers.
The sad fact is that this is a being treated like a middle-of-the-road phone. Devs do like their sexy and sadly this device isn't as sexy as a SGS2 or the upcoming SGS3. Therefore interest is low. With the multitude of phones growing at such a rapid pace, there isn't enough talent out there to cover them all. If you want rom development, you gotta go for the phones the developers will want. And you also shouldn't buy something that has just come out.
From a tech side, even though this seems to have the specs of an SGS2, it seems internally to be wildly different from an SGS2. It is named in the SGS family and it'd not similar to anything there either. It's all ext4 (fairly different).
I've been working on this phone in my spare time trying to get a build that would run. I am not a programmer but thought that my skills were enough to hobble together a working CM7 device profile. I thought I could look at similar devices and come up with a working hybrid of other devices. Here's the thing.... there don't really seem to be any (or many) other msm8660 in the official repos. It's hard to find other devices that are similar to this one.
With ICS coming out for this phone at some point, I'm not even sure I want to spend that much time focusing on CM7 anymore since presumably we'll be able to get native drivers for the cameras at that point.
If you want to help, then offer to take up a collection to commission a dev's time or send someone a phone. It's difficult to do this process from a distance. I spent money on my own hardware and I'm deathly afraid of damaging my flash memory with constant flashes and what not.
dr4stic giving you a thanks just wasnt enough
dont forget man your always welcome in teh irc channel, may not know a whole lot but whatever i do know i happily share
oh and official no, but for the msm8660 you might wanna look here
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1230
the evo 3d has that cpu and is gsm as well
lol
Yeah, I imagine that first line in my post is what did it too ;-)
Thanks so much dude for all you've done. I know I'm welcome. It's just that after my day job (and some of my night job), the last thing I wanna do is look at a computer. And I got told this week I've got a 90 day deadline to complete 2-3 of the biggest projects and migrations I've ever had to do for my work.
As for the evo 3d, I actually did look at it, as well as the skyrocket. There are just too many quirks. Plus I believe the msm8660 handles part of the camera interface and the Evo 3D has a very funky implementation in that space. It ended up just looking more confusing to me than helpful :-(
From the way things are looking, I'm REALLY starting to look forward more to doing this for ICS. I get the sense that I might have an easier time there. I do, however, plan to keep moving forward ;-)
I am a big fan of the hardware QWERTY keyboards and BB seems to be only choice for a phone with decent keyboard. The problem is that I prefer the Android OS.
I know that you are magicians here so the question is - is it possible to port android on BB Q10? I know that for the older BB phones it was impossible, but the new ones use hardware which quiet similar to the average android phone. I assume there should be no problem at least from driver point of view.
Thanks for the answer.
You should post your question/ request here...
http://www.blackberryforums.com/
Most of the people here works with Android or Linux. Android is an open source. It's easier and legal(Not sure about all county) to unlock the bootloader of an Android device. But in case of blackberry I don't think it is gonna be so. it's lot more secure. Last of all this magicians woks with basically Linux based OS. To port android on a Blackberry device you gotta know the Processor architecture(I don't think that's public for a BlackBerry device) of that device gotta make a completely new kernel so that the Device and OS know each other. I agree with you "That's possible" but I can only imagine what's it gonna take to make the word "Possible" true.
The processor in Q10 is Snapdragon S4. Knowing how Qualcom is structuring their business now, the radio should also be known from android phones. Yes the bootloader will be a challenge.
I also don't get point to forward me to the BB forums. Android has put on so many devices that it wasn't supposed to be. Yes they were easier, but I thought the people here like the challenges
Anyway the question was not exactly a request to start doing but to see if you know for such project already ongoing.
idimitro said:
The processor in Q10 is Snapdragon S4. Knowing how Qualcom is structuring their business now, the radio should also be known from android phones. Yes the bootloader will be a challenge.
I also don't get point to forward me to the BB forums. Android has put on so many devices that it wasn't supposed to be. Yes they were easier, but I thought the people here like the challenges
Anyway the question was not exactly a request to start doing but to see if you know for such project already ongoing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think there are any of these projects.
Most people are not really interested in doing BB's because the specs mostly do not match the price compared to android.
laurensschu said:
Most people are not really interested in doing BB's because the specs mostly do not match the price compared to android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, a full QWERTY keyboard does weigh in for some of us
No updates on that subjet? Did someone started a projet on bbdroid? Personally i have a one (m7), a s6 edge, a note 3 and a nexus 6p, i use bb q10 for my job and i would like to custom my os on it what is really hard on bbos, android would be a clear solution do my customisation needs