Database Info

Dual Core Question

I am just wondering. I am a huge fan of android and am using Desire HD now. But I was wondering if a dual core tablet can be installed with Windows 7? I only need the W7 just to sync with my android phone. Maybe I can install RUU or any other ROMS in the future using my tablet.

Not quite sure what your asking here... Dual Core x86 processor tablets would probably run windows 7, Dual Core Arm Processor can not as windows is x86 processor specification and Android is Arm. All android devices are compatible to the best of my knowledge with windows 7 so if your worried about getting an android tablet and not having support for it then don't worry. Other than that i hope i answered your question.

Moved to general

Windows 7 can only be installed on x86 systems. Older versions of Windows NT could be installed on other CPUs like Alpha and Power PC and Windows server has a version that can run on Itanium/IA-64 but they are dropping it.
Microsoft has claimed Windows 8 will run on ARM systems so when it comes out you may be able to use it but most programs won't run it.

The Old One said:
Windows 7 can only be installed on x86 systems. Older versions of Windows NT could be installed on other CPUs like Alpha and Power PC and Windows server has a version that can run on Itanium/IA-64 but they are dropping it.
Microsoft has claimed Windows 8 will run on ARM systems so when it comes out you may be able to use it but most programs won't run it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the dual boot Viewpad 10 use (x)86 processors? Is Android 1.6 the last or latest Android OS that can run on the (x)86 platform?
I'm just curious as to how Viewsonic gets both OS's to run on viewpad 10 platform, so this looks like a good place to ask about that.

Yes, Atom x86 CPU and Android 1.6 (last version to support x86).
Does the dual boot Viewpad 10 use (x)86 processors? Is Android 1.6 the last or latest Android OS that can run on the (x)86 platform?
I'm just curious as to how Viewsonic gets both OS's to run on viewpad 10 platform, so this looks like a good place to ask about that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

GaryHypnosis said:
Does the dual boot Viewpad 10 use (x)86 processors? Is Android 1.6 the last or latest Android OS that can run on the (x)86 platform?
I'm just curious as to how Viewsonic gets both OS's to run on viewpad 10 platform, so this looks like a good place to ask about that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Viewsonic's Viewpad 10 uses the intel atom cpu to my knowledge. I don't know the details behind it but have read that Android 1.6 is the last version of Android that can run on x86 architecture. Maybe a dev. will be able to explain that part.
It would have made lots of sense for Google to make 2.x and up compatible with x86/x64 but I suppose there may be politics involved (imho, it can't be much else, since Linux runs on everything and Android is based almost entirely on Linux)....or maybe it would be more work or too much code needed. Since 2.2 is meant primarily for phones first, maybe they didn't see a need to bloat it up.
I wouldn't mind if Android needed a 650MB-1GB install as long as it works well.
Here's a snippet, you will be able to find more if you google it....though I can't find a reason as to why myself.

Hi,
I don't know if VS did their own work or may have used stuff from the Android X86 project:
http://www.android-x86.org/
or something similar (I think that there are other efforts like this)...
As you can see, the project is currently on 1.6, but:
http://www.android-x86.org/#What_we_are_working_on_now
says their working on Froyo:
What we are working on now
Port Froyo to x86 (froyo-x86 branch)
OpenGL hardware accelerator to froyo-x86 (olv, cwhuang)
New x86 toolchain (cwhuang)
Ethernet update (Yi)
Automount for new vold (cwhuang)
New target sparta (Doug)
New target viewpad10 (Al Sutton)
New target viliv s5 (okwon)
Mplayer porting (okwon
BTW, if you have a Windows PC, you can actually run that Android (1.6) on it. I had done that earlier, before getting my Gtab.
Jim

As one of the members pointed out, and if you check out the hands ons that have been done recently, ViewPad10 does indeed use Androidx86 project. GREAT News is, they just released Froyo-x86 (http://www.android-x86.org/releases/release_2_2) and there is a specific ISO for the ViewPad10. I actually just ordered 5 from one of my vendors (1 to keep and 4 to sell) so I am definitely going to pop that Froyo-x86 in mine and see how it whirls! I'm very excited by the prospects of a dual boot Froyo7 tablet!

Did you load the 2.2 iso onto one, and if so how well did it work? I just want to use a copy of android so I can use the apps I already bought for my phone.

Some of the latest so called 'dual-boot' tablets are actually going to be using an android virtual machine which will run within windows.
If anyone's comfortable compiling their own kernel and drivers then they stand a chance of 'rolling their own' VM otherwise unless someone with the knowhow takes up the banner for a particular device, I would consider this option out of reach.

Which tablet devices have you seen running an Android VM? I ran the 2.2 live USB on my VPad10 but it was missing wifi. Everything else seems to run great. Its fast and functional! Except the wifi. :-(
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App

the v10 specific iso didn't support wifi?!?!?!?

VPad and Froyo
I've picked up a VPad10 and have tried upgrading Android to 2.2 and have found that the interface buttons seemed out of place . I had a hard time moving backwards through the various pages - I had to tap the upper right corner on the bar and tap a second time in order to move back to the previous screen.
I found the interface too different from the standard to make it useful. I've since reverted back to 1.6
I had difficulty loading the Froyo (.img.gz) version. I've tried opening the gz on my Linux machine (vcersus my Windows box) and still get the same problem. Can the Froyo beta be loaded as iso image like the others, it would make my life easier?

I placed an order for the 10" gtablet the other day. This thread saved me from some dissapointment by trying to save a couple bucks.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

Ubuntu Linux (vs. Android) for phones and tablets?

Many would prefer a real Linux running on their phones or tablets, and that might not be too far away: http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/11/01/ubuntu-versus-android-for-phones-and-tablets/
Now how about a Gnome or KDE desktop environment to go with it?
Sent from my unrooted DroidX using Tapatalk from GetJar

Hi, im spam

Plasma is already being developed for mobile devices. Looks very promising.
Shoot me if I'm wrong, but MeeGo looks great as well.
Sent with Trix.

I support all open-source variants whether it is android, ubuntu, webos or meego
by the way, someone has tried to port ubuntu 11.04 to touchpad
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1304475

Why limit it to just one distro? What I'd like to have is the ability to run any chosen distro. This would require a bootloader that can load an arbitrary kernel, and all hardware drivers in a form that allows them to be compiled for any arbitrary kernel. This means keeping up with new releases of the kernel and new X versions. Like Nvidia does it for their Geforce graphic cards. Even better would be open-source drivers, but if the vendor keeps up, I don't mind a closed driver for a few hardware pieces.
But that's utopian thinking. And that's why (plus a few other reasons) I'll always prefer a netbook over a tablet. As for phones, with Nokia dropping Meego, I don't see any "true" Linux taking off.

omajgat said:
Hi, im spam
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:-( the 10 post limit strikes again..
sent...ah whatever its on there now..

Moved

I/O Issue - Is it really unique to transformer line?

EDITED as more information about other platforms were found.
Based on my reading here, it sounds like there are two theories exist currently.
1, ASUS using old kernel
2. Tegra chip issue
However, following information seems to challenge these hypothesis..
According to this http://forum.xda-developers.com/show....php?t=1722799, Iconia A700 has very similar result and also Kernel info shows 2.6.39.4+.
So based on this, I think we can hypothesize couple things:
Hypothesis 1: Kernel is the issue
One flag goes against this is that Nexus 7, which uses the latest kernel did not outperform transformer line by much. So it may boost some, but unlikely to be the sole cause of the problem.
Hypothesis 2: Tegra chipset is the issue
On the andropolice benchmark page, they included HTC One X with Tegra 3 version. It actually outperformed it counterpart and in fact was one of the best I/O benchmark result producing unit excluding Nexus Phone. So it is hard to believe Tegra 3 is the issue.
Hypothesis 3: ASUS is the issue
This well may be true, but when you look at Acer Iconia 700 Tegra 3 HD Screen model, it is as bad or perhaps slightly worse than the Transformer Infinity. So perhaps there is a part of kernel that they share or provided by someone?
Hypothesis 4: Tablet SSD/Flash or other common denominator hardware is the issue
Again this is something based on the Iconia vs. Infinity. Infinity has superior CPU and RAM yet the difference in IO is so subtle. This to me suggest bottleneck lies somewhere else. Such as SSD/Flash drive itself? Though I am not sure if that is major advantage of HTC One over Tablet as you would think smaller drives are tends to be slower and more expensive...
I know we still have not answered anything here, but at least, this result make a step further to suggest underlying issue is NOT unique to infinity but perhaps wider problem across the android tablet. If so, the chance of it getting fixed would either depend on the Google or individual manufactures to put unexpected amount of resource into this...
What do you all think?

HoushaSen said:
Based on my reading here, it sounds like there are two theories exist currently.
1, ASUS using old kernel
2. Tegra chip issue
However, following information seems to challenge these hypothesis..
According to this http://forum.xda-developers.com/show....php?t=1722799, Iconia A700 has very similar result and also Kernel info shows 2.6.39.4+.
So based on this, I think we can hypothesize couple things:
Hypothesis 1: Kernel is the issue
If so, who is actually making this kernel? Is it vendors of tablet or Google? i.e. Samsung doing its own customization which includes the newer Kernel? One thing that does not make sense here (at least to me) is that if you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_version_history, the Kernel is based on the version of Android i.e. sounds like NOT dependent on the manufacture. However, clearly the picture above shows Iconia A700, which runs Ice Cream Sandwitch is not running on newer kernel as stated by the Wiki... So I am a bit confused here...
Hypothesis 2: Tablet SSD or other common denominator hardware is the issue
Considering the faster Tegra 3 (not by much but some), and better RAM (DDR3 vs. DDR2) and minimal differece between the two systems, my guess is Tegra 3 chip or memory is not the bottle neck, but rather SSD or other common component is the issue.
I know we still have not answered anything here, but at least, this result make a step further to suggest underlying issue is NOT unique to infinity but perhaps wider problem across the android tablet. If so, the chance of it getting fixed would either depend on the Google or individual manufactures to put unexpected amount of resource into this...
What do you all think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kernels are created by the manufacturer, they're what tell the OS about the hardware and how to use it. Google makes the Operating system, not the kernel. Each kernel is different on each device because each device has different hardware.
So I'm thinking it's just a software issue. I haven't really looked into it, but I haven't heard a ton of complaints about I/O issues from One X users. I think this whole issue is just normal Android stuff that people are blowing out of proportions because it may be a little worse on this right now. I know on my Bionic when a lot of I/O operations are happening, it slows down a bit. Especially with restoring Titanium Backup files and moving big files around. I'm thinking with a little help from Asus and/or indy devs this won't be a big issue.

If you use old software, you always miss out on some features. (Office 95 won't open OpenDocument-formatted documents, AFAIK. ) That being said, it is quite common for SSDs to use a number of controllers that is suboptimal for the number of memory units. That might be a problem.
Given that I perceive the TF700 to be quite a bit snappier with the SuperCharger, I think it's quite possible the issue is in fact caused by an interaction of multiple factors: standard Android policies (not being able to clear out finished-and-not-to-be-used-anytime-soon apps, filling RAM to the brim py preference), suboptimal hardware (crippled I/O controller(s)?) and software (kernel issues).
The second component obviously is out of reach in terms of solutions.The first component could be alleviated partly -- this going head-on with the considerations for earlier and less capable Android systems -- by using a task killer, or optimizing the system (SuperCharger), and the third component could be solved by some of the unbelievably able kernel enthusiasts we have in the XDA ecosystem.
I think we might have a case on hand here for arguing that the current versions of Android are not really optimal for these high-end devices. Scaling issues are not that rare: Windows scales like crap to less capable devices, whereas all *nix systems I've worked with ran beautifully on pretty much archaic systems, and the latter don't gain as much when upgrading hardware, in my experience. From a cynical point of view, you might argue that that's because they ran REALLY well initially anyway.
The policies in force for both scenarios are necessarily different. It might be beneficial to change some of them a little bit. If Google does not institute that by its mighty self, we can at the least take matters in our own hands.

KilerG said:
Kernels are created by the manufacturer, they're what tell the OS about the hardware and how to use it. Google makes the Operating system, not the kernel. Each kernel is different on each device because each device has different hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I guess Wiki is not correct... They often amazes me how much detail there are and quite frequently right. But I guess not this time as Wiki clearly assigns each Android OS version as based on XXX Linux Kernel. But what you say actual make sense as Kernel is like interface between the OS and underlying hardware so my understanding is Kernel just simply provides set of API that meets the OS demand.
But if this is indeed the case and Kernel is the real conundrum then the chance of it being fixed may be much lower, isn't it? Because fixing kernel or upgrading kernel to newer version probably requires extensive amount of work, which I am not sure any company is willing to do when the machines are already sold.
If it was Google, perhaps they could have indeed updated kernel along with Jellybean, but that's out of picture now except of XDA members.
MartyHulskemper said:
I think we might have a case on hand here for arguing that the current versions of Android are not really optimal for these high-end devices. Scaling issues are not that rare: Windows scales like crap to less capable devices, whereas all *nix systems I've worked with ran beautifully on pretty much archaic systems, and the latter don't gain as much when upgrading hardware, in my experience. From a cynical point of view, you might argue that that's because they ran REALLY well initially anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting argument there. One hope I have here is that if Nexus 7 succeeds, developers are more willing to put apps specific for tablets. yes. they may be 7 inch... but better than 4 or 5 inch scaling to 10.1 inch. Plus Nexus 7 has very similar spec as Transformer Prime, so supporting of such device seem to make ASUS ahead of packs and in fact, (if they decide to do so) they can easily port those knowledge and resources into Transformer line.
But this IO issue may be one reason why iOS avoids true multitasking. I can never download files or load files in a application in background on my iPAD2. It basically freezes the application where left off i.e. not really multitasking. But because of it, most application won't see any issue what other application is running in background (well actually nothing is running in background..but you know what I mean).
So I am not saying, Android should take this approach but perhaps we may have to take that into consideration and appreciate true multitasking in Android. and when the task becomes large (such as IO issue here), we may simply have to understand some tasks are not for multitask friendly...

Mostly interesting questions but when it comes to nvidia and i/o problems lets blame it on the kernel drivers.
Look at around 48 min mark.
www . youtube . com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MShbP3OpASA
Do you think Asus seriously cares about its customers??

HoushaSen said:
So I guess Wiki is not correct... They often amazes me how much detail there are and quite frequently right. But I guess not this time as Wiki clearly assigns each Android OS version as based on XXX Linux Kernel. But what you say actual make sense as Kernel is like interface between the OS and underlying hardware so my understanding is Kernel just simply provides set of API that meets the OS demand.
But if this is indeed the case and Kernel is the real conundrum then the chance of it being fixed may be much lower, isn't it? Because fixing kernel or upgrading kernel to newer version probably requires extensive amount of work, which I am not sure any company is willing to do when the machines are already sold.
If it was Google, perhaps they could have indeed updated kernel along with Jellybean, but that's out of picture now except of XDA members.
Interesting argument there. One hope I have here is that if Nexus 7 succeeds, developers are more willing to put apps specific for tablets. yes. they may be 7 inch... but better than 4 or 5 inch scaling to 10.1 inch. Plus Nexus 7 has very similar spec as Transformer Prime, so supporting of such device seem to make ASUS ahead of packs and in fact, (if they decide to do so) they can easily port those knowledge and resources into Transformer line.
But this IO issue may be one reason why iOS avoids true multitasking. I can never download files or load files in a application in background on my iPAD2. It basically freezes the application where left off i.e. not really multitasking. But because of it, most application won't see any issue what other application is running in background (well actually nothing is running in background..but you know what I mean).
So I am not saying, Android should take this approach but perhaps we may have to take that into consideration and appreciate true multitasking in Android. and when the task becomes large (such as IO issue here), we may simply have to understand some tasks are not for multitask friendly...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope (and actually expect) that JB will fix a lot of these issues, as it seems to tweak lot of elements that might be in the way of Android really deploying on capable hardware. As far as the Nexus 7 goes, it probably is a really nice device, but I am too much infatuated with the HD screen and the battery/keyboard/dock I currently have to even consider going over.
And yes, maybe we just have to accept that, for the time being, real mobile multitasking (i.e., relatively limitless) may be out of reach. According to your experience with the iPad2, it may show that Apple actually did some real-life testing and came to the same conclusion. That may have been the reason for the much criticised decision to not support multitasking.

Someone mentioned on our Infinity fora here that all the flash memory used in today's tablet is the same chip, so it's not somebody in ASUS or Acer didn't want to spend an extra 10$ per device, it must be something else.
I'm still wondering why I get ca. 10MB/s write and ca. 20MB/s read on internal storage and the other way around with (micro)SD or USB storage.
I think all of us are waiting for JB right now.

Its definitely a kernel issue. If you look in the Prime forum, there's a lot of people raving about the IO performance of Motley's kernel. In the TF300 forum, there's been some mention that CM9 improves the browser performance Once we get a bootloader unlock I'd be shocked if we didnt get a better kernel, if Asus hasn't fixed it already by then.

The old kernel is caused by NVidia because in every Tegra 3 device the kernel is the same: 2.6.... Nexus 7 seems to have 3.1 kernel and hopefully all Tegra 3 devices which get JB will get updated kernel. Old kernel isn't Asus' fault. It is NVidia's fault. Google built ICS with 3.0 kernel and that is why almost all other devices except Tegra 3 devices have Linux kernel version 3.0.

attelaut said:
The old kernel is caused by NVidia because in every Tegra 3 device the kernel is the same: 2.6.... Nexus 7 seems to have 3.1 kernel and hopefully all Tegra 3 devices which get JB will get updated kernel. Old kernel isn't Asus' fault. It is NVidia's fault. Google built ICS with 3.0 kernel and that is why almost all other devices except Tegra 3 devices have Linux kernel version 3.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait correct me if I am wrong. So you are saying, as stated in the Wiki when original Android OS is developed e.g. ICS it used Linux kernel version 3.0.x but then when ASUS or other manufactors using Tegra 3 chip only got access to Kernel 2.6 because it is what Nvida provided? So blame is actually on the Nvidia?
So how did Nexus 7 got new kernel? It uses Tegra 3, ASUS is involved... Is it google that forced NVida to upgrade to newer kernel? In any event, do Kernel usually get updated along with OS update?
One pessimistic comment though.. If we look at Andropolice benchmark Nexus 7 was included there, and their IO result was not much better than Transformer line.

HoushaSen said:
Wait correct me if I am wrong. So you are saying, as stated in the Wiki when original Android OS is developed e.g. ICS it used Linux kernel version 3.0.x but then when ASUS or other manufactors using Tegra 3 chip only got access to Kernel 2.6 because it is what Nvida provided? So blame is actually on the Nvidia?
So how did Nexus 7 got new kernel? It uses Tegra 3, ASUS is involved... Is it google that forced NVida to upgrade to newer kernel? In any event, do Kernel usually get updated along with OS update?
One pessimistic comment though.. If we look at Andropolice benchmark Nexus 7 was included there, and their IO result was not much better than Transformer line.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its entirely possible that Asus decided backporting 3.X's features to a 2.6 kernel would be easier than to do a 3.X kernel from the ground up. Its the route many devices without official ICS have taken to get their community builds and for most of those devices it works just fine.
The Nexus 7 had the advantage of being being handled by Google for software, and as such had no legacy code to be based on. The 700, on the other hand, was close enough to the Prime that Asus probably decided to use the kernel of the later as a base.
This is just speculation though.

jdefi3ebuggdsf32 said:
Mostly interesting questions but when it comes to nvidia and i/o problems lets blame it on the kernel drivers.
Look at around 48 min mark.
www . youtube . com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MShbP3OpASA
Do you think Asus seriously cares about its customers??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So NVIDIA is the issue then? I like his comment, at the end. "So NVIDIA, F*CK YOU."

Jotokun said:
Its entirely possible that Asus decided backporting 3.X's features to a 2.6 kernel would be easier than to do a 3.X kernel from the ground up. Its the route many devices without official ICS have taken to get their community builds and for most of those devices it works just fine.
The Nexus 7 had the advantage of being being handled by Google for software, and as such had no legacy code to be based on. The 700, on the other hand, was close enough to the Prime that Asus probably decided to use the kernel of the later as a base.
This is just speculation though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But reasonable speculation. I don't think you're far off with these assumptions.
Here's hoping that JB and maybe even some kernel updates and tweaks can at least alleviate the IO issues.

The kernel is a part of OS and can be updated when the OS is updated. I think the kernel is old because Nvidia hadn't lot of time to prepare the kernel to be compatible with new android. Now when nvidia have bee working with google and asus so maybe google have helped nvidia to make new kernel to work with tegra 3. If you want new kernel, find a working custom rom with new kernel and use it.

attelaut said:
The kernel is a part of OS and can be updated when the OS is updated. I think the kernel is old because Nvidia hadn't lot of time to prepare the kernel to be compatible with new android. Now when nvidia have bee working with google and asus so maybe google have helped nvidia to make new kernel to work with tegra 3. If you want new kernel, find a working custom rom with new kernel and use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well at this point, we should be waiting for the bootloader to be unlockable. Once we can load custom kernels, the tablet will zooooooooooom.

KilerG said:
Well at this point, we should be waiting for the bootloader to be unlockable. Once we can load custom kernels, the tablet will zooooooooooom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did custom ROMs solve the I/O problems with the Prime entirely? (never owned one)

d14b0ll0s said:
Did custom ROMs solve the I/O problems with the Prime entirely? (never owned one)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this thread, it does.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1768406

Jotokun said:
According to this thread, it does.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1768406
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no it doesnt help entirely. it helps a bit but it does not solve the problems.
for instance the browser still locks up a lot, some ANR messages every now now and then.
only way to get the browser stable is by using browser2ram.

Seems it can be a hard way out of the T3 path.
Have you tried Dolphin browser on your Prime btw? (if I assume correctly that you own one) It helps a lot on the Infinity (Chrome is slightly faster than the stock browser, but is said not to support H/W acceleration, which makes it slower on content-loaded pages)
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using xda app-developers app

I am sure someone else has already noticed, but HTC One X which had one of top I/O result on Andropolice benchmark has a version with Tegra 3, which still performed well in fact often outperformed its counter part. I could not find which Kernel it uses though. But this may perhaps be one evidence goes against Tegra 3 is the actual issue, but rather something else. And also noting Nexus 7, which used Kernel 3.1 not doing that much better than transformer line also put a flag against Kernel being underlying issue. Could it really be the flash drive itself?
Now to put these in summary, I edited my opening post.

Ubuntu on our HTC One X?

http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/android
http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/02/ubuntu-for-smartphones/
So? what's it going to take?

zoltrix said:
http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/android
http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/02/ubuntu-for-smartphones/
So? what's it going to take?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the new ubuntu OS looks sexy !!

Two Separate Things
To clarify, those are two separate things. One is an entirely new mobile phone OS, the other is a docked desktop OS that runs alongside Android, sharing the kernel and other resources. The Engadget article for the Ubuntu for Android is here: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/24/ubuntu-for-android-hands-on/. I'm very excited about the possibility of Ubuntu for Android, but it looks like only OEMs can talk to them about it.

I like the way the OS looks, but I rather have buttons than have swipe gestures. Gestures are what my playbook and RIM excel at.
Sent from my One X using xda app-developers app

they should make an Ubuntu development subforum once this bad boy gets ported

WOW
This is simply marvelous:good:, I love it!

I'd pay to have a working port of that!
Sent from my One X using Tapatalk 2

I read they are going to release test builds for the galaxy nexus periodicly... But if its Ubuntu... I'm sure its going to be completely open source and it said its built to use android kernel and drivers so I'm sure one day we will get a port. Not sure if our phone is capable of running the Ubuntu os and the desktop dock thing. It said to use desktop dock you have to have a quadcore
Sent from my One X using xda app-developers app

dustinhayes93 said:
I read they are going to release test builds for the galaxy nexus periodicly... But if its Ubuntu... I'm sure its going to be completely open source and it said its built to use android kernel and drivers so I'm sure one day we will get a port. Not sure if our phone is capable of running the Ubuntu os and the desktop dock thing. It said to use desktop dock you have to have a quadcore
Sent from my One X using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reading further you yes they intend to have it completely open source and they also plan to make it easily portable to devices that run android
I'm definitely going to want to see it
Sent from my One X using Tapatalk 2

Ubuntu on an XL with a bluetooth kb and mouse and something like a Toshiba Dynadock would rock. We'd have a vga out, multiple powered usb ports, headphone jack and a wired network connection in addition to 3G/4G and wifi.
Given that the One XL outperforms a lot of the quadcore phones on the market, it should be powerful enough to run this.
I'm running desktop Ubuntu on an old G5 imac (1 * 1.8GHz ppc processor). That is fast enough for my uses. It should scream on the dual 1.5GHz S4's.
I do recall putting together a linux from scratch OS while I was at uni ... Hrmm. I was actually due for a new computer. Maybe I'll turn my phone into my desktop.

Just finished watching the youtube intro for this. So excited. This is what I've been waiting for, for a very long time.

I installed Ubuntu natively on my Xoom a while back, it ran a bit slow but was useable. The main problem was the touchscreen driver. The HOXL is quite a bit faster than the Xoom, so it should work nicely. I'd like to get my hands on that smartphone version of Ubuntu.

codeprimate said:
Ubuntu on an XL with a bluetooth kb and mouse and something like a Toshiba Dynadock would rock. We'd have a vga out, multiple powered usb ports, headphone jack and a wired network connection in addition to 3G/4G and wifi.
Given that the One XL outperforms a lot of the quadcore phones on the market, it should be powerful enough to run this.
I'm running desktop Ubuntu on an old G5 imac (1 * 1.8GHz ppc processor). That is fast enough for my uses. It should scream on the dual 1.5GHz S4's.
I do recall putting together a linux from scratch OS while I was at uni ... Hrmm. I was actually due for a new computer. Maybe I'll turn my phone into my desktop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you sound a little overly optimistic in my opinion. I don't think it'll run nearly as smooth as you think, but hell, compared to a PPC970 it may actually be faster. Your biggest issue is going to be the lack of memory. 1 GB is going to start looking mighty low when it comes to running desktop apps on it.
In their specs, they name a quad core A9 as required to run the desktop mode, but in my opinion I wouldn't really bother getting too excited until you're running at least an A15. An Exynos 5 Quad with 2 GB of RAM would probably run quite nicely. Anything less and I think you'll be dealing with a somewhat slow system. Look at the Chromebooks with the Exynos 5. People are loading Ubuntu on those and saying they run great. That's where I'd put the baseline for a desktop, but again, memory would be your biggest limitation at that point. I suppose it also depends on what they can strip out of the desktop version of Ubuntu that comes bundled. If it can be very lightweight, it would help greatly in the memory use department.
Speaking of stripping things out, the One X isn't likely going to be an ideal device for this due to it's lack of storage space also. You'd run out of space REALLY fast if you tried to install a few desktop apps.

AJerman said:
I think you sound a little overly optimistic in my opinion. I don't think it'll run nearly as smooth as you think, but hell, compared to a PPC970 it may actually be faster. Your biggest issue is going to be the lack of memory. 1 GB is going to start looking mighty low when it comes to running desktop apps on it.
In their specs, they name a quad core A9 as required to run the desktop mode, but in my opinion I wouldn't really bother getting too excited until you're running at least an A15. An Exynos 5 Quad with 2 GB of RAM would probably run quite nicely. Anything less and I think you'll be dealing with a somewhat slow system. Look at the Chromebooks with the Exynos 5. People are loading Ubuntu on those and saying they run great. That's where I'd put the baseline for a desktop, but again, memory would be your biggest limitation at that point. I suppose it also depends on what they can strip out of the desktop version of Ubuntu that comes bundled. If it can be very lightweight, it would help greatly in the memory use department.
Speaking of stripping things out, the One X isn't likely going to be an ideal device for this due to it's lack of storage space also. You'd run out of space REALLY fast if you tried to install a few desktop apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, I'm optimistic. It won't be a highly spec'd desktop by any means, but I'm not really a gamer (the only games I'd play on it would be chess and freeciv. You are correct - 1 GB of RAM is not a lot, and it'd struggle with any heavyweight desktop app, but I've got the Tesltra HTC one XL (which is 32 GB not 16 like the AT&T version), so it should be slightly more usable (at least while I'm waiting for manufacturers to start releasing linux phones).
For storage I'd mostly be using my home NAS, and the cloud options available.
I get that it will be quite limited, but I'd still like to see what it can do

Voice of confidence.!

I am a beginner on this page. I am writing this to backup the other developers on this form. A lot of people who has been going around on the surface forum repeating over and over fat some functions will never work. I've been around modding phones since when Windows Mobile 3 came out back when I was in middle school. I remember when Windows Mobile came out a website called geekstoolbox.com whats the phone for many modders to build custom firmware for Windows Phones. I remembered and middle school it was difficult to make certain improvements because Windows Mobile phones were close systems. I remember then listen to visit on the forum who actually broken too the phone am I allowed a dump of data to flow in Internet of his phone start new custom ROM custom firmware revolution to begin. Afterwards, I begin saying revolutionary products such as wifi tether, Bluetooth tethering, Mobile sharing, and in custom OS. to those web visiting thi about s forum repeating over and over and over, that there would be no Windows based x86 programs on when does RT we'll be eating crow when it finally does happen within the next few months. I see it being possible when you consider if someone will, compile a virtual machine enabling many features of Windows 8 x86. Furthermore, suppose it becomes like parallels Macintosh. In addition, maybe someone will develop 8 translator package for Windows 82 windows Rt to understand each other's programs. all that I am saying is please do not be downers and out other people expressions about this tablet and is always
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium

I meant to end by saying, please do not doubt other people's expressions about this templates capabilities in with the wish to see on this tablet because the possibilities are there and if someone desires it enough it will come to fruition.
Continuously be blessed signing out!
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium

There are already two x86 emulators (Bochs and DosBox) for Windows RT. Bochs is slow to the point of being unusable, and DosBox is slow to the point of lagging while playing games from 1992.
x86 will likely never run (games) well on Windows RT, but it does in fact already run.

See,! It already possible . I have 1 questions, do they use virtual machines or do they do rely on the Internet
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium

befreshshaveivorysalesoap said:
See,! It already possible . I have 1 questions, do they use virtual machines or do they do rely on the Internet
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They use virtual machines, but they're slow to the point of complete uselessness. It takes half an hour to boot XP in them.

befreshshaveivorysalesoap said:
I meant to end by saying, please do not doubt other people's expressions about this templates capabilities in with the wish to see on this tablet because the possibilities are there and if someone desires it enough it will come to fruition.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tempered with a dose of reality, when you acknowledge that even a dual core ARM cpu is still very underpowered to emulate a full x86 cpu/environment. If what you want is a good x86 experience, the Surface RT isn't what you want.
That's not saying you can't get a decent toy x86 environment, or really good recompiled for arm desktop apps. Those two work fine.

schettj said:
Tempered with a dose of reality, when you acknowledge that even a dual core ARM cpu is still very underpowered to emulate a full x86 cpu/environment. If what you want is a good x86 experience, the Surface RT isn't what you want.
That's not saying you can't get a decent toy x86 environment, or really good recompiled for arm desktop apps. Those two work fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe not the full experience but something like WINE on Linux. Most people who buys the RT version aren't power PC users and don't require much anyhow , except for a few apps

befreshshaveivorysalesoap said:
Maybe not the full experience but something like WINE on Linux. Most people who buys the RT version aren't power PC users and don't require much anyhow , except for a few apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wine on x86 linux isn't emulating the CPU. This is a critical difference.

schettj said:
Tempered with a dose of reality, when you acknowledge that even a dual core ARM cpu is still very underpowered to emulate a full x86 cpu/environment. If what you want is a good x86 experience, the Surface RT isn't what you want.
That's not saying you can't get a decent toy x86 environment, or really good recompiled for arm desktop apps. Those two work fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe that all the Windows RT devices are quad core right now.
befreshshaveivorysalesoap said:
Maybe not the full experience but something like WINE on Linux. Most people who buys the RT version aren't power PC users and don't require much anyhow , except for a few apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really very unlikely that any x86 program bigger than Notepad will ever be usability fast/stable. I'd go read up a bit on emulation and the downsides regarding speed with it. This is the same reason that android tablets, which are quite arguably far more suited for this, can't do anything better than emulate 20 year old OSes, and do that poorly.

netham45 said:
I believe that all the Windows RT devices are quad core right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
d'oh! flip flopping between windows phone 8 and windows RT Yep, 4 arm cores. Still like trying to emulate a V8 with an inline4.

netham45 said:
I believe that all the Windows RT devices are quad core right now.
It's really very unlikely that any x86 program bigger than Notepad will ever be usability fast/stable. I'd go read up a bit on emulation and the downsides regarding speed with it. This is the same reason that android tablets, which are quite arguably far more suited for this, can't do anything better than emulate 20 year old OSes, and do that poorly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Instead of emulating an entire OS, would anyone entertain the idea of a program translator; A program could be build with the libraries of some main OS'es. Within the translator, when an x86 program is called the programs determines what operating systems' library to use. The translator would then render a version of the program Windows with RT can understand.
Couldn't this be likely.

netham45 said:
There are already two x86 emulators (Bochs and DosBox) for Windows RT. Bochs is slow to the point of being unusable, and DosBox is slow to the point of lagging while playing games from 1992.
x86 will likely never run (games) well on Windows RT, but it does in fact already run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe I no what the issue with these are.......... Bochs and DosBox do not allow users to control processing cores for each emulation. These emulators need to be updated to take advantage of this feature, it's a blessing for other OS'es

There's already a translator project much like what you describe, actually. It's early alpha quality right now, only able to run a few apps and those slowly and with stability problems, but it's a very promising proof of concept. The developer is using the DOSBox dynamic recompilation engine, optimized for THUMB-2 (ARM variant that Windows uses) with some hacks in it to remove support for stuff that only the kernel has to care about like page tables and whatnot (these hacks apparently substantially increase speed). The recompilation engine is not currently thread-safe, which means it has to run on a single core (although it's possible that the translated program itself might be able to run across multiple cores; I don't know for sure) but the possibility of fixing that is being investigated.
The project is on the Dev&Hacking sub-forum, and there's a download link for it and a (mostly playable) demo of Heroes of Might and Magic 3 as an example of what it can currently do.

Can someone point me in the duration to learn about building for ARM. I want to see if I can contribute. In school I am only learning about the x86 and x64 architectural

befreshshaveivorysalesoap said:
Can someone point me in the duration to learn about building for ARM. I want to see if I can contribute. In school I am only learning about the x86 and x64 architectural
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Currently this is the porting method: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2096820&highlight=arm
Requires visual studio to cross compile from a desktop windows machine.