Related
Hi Guys
I'm currently a very heavy business user of my WinMob Acer M900 and whilst this phone is almost perfect, it has one issue - it runs out of RAM all the time (why Acer?! WHY!?)
Anyway, so i'm going to have to replace this phone as it costs me more of my time managing it and rebuilding it to clean it up that its probably more cost effective to spend a few hundred quid replacing it.
So, as part of this, I thought "why not Android?". A few question need to be answered before I can do this though so I thought I would come to the experts (yes, thats YOU ):
1. Does it have full sync with Outlook (to include mail, contacts, tasks and calendars)
2. Can it process (and send) ICAL?
3. Are there Word and Excel EDITORS available? (Powerpoint is optional)
4. Can 2.0 show the proper Flash stuff yet? (more explained later)
5. Does the web browsing experience honestly compete with Opera 10b on WinMob?
6. Can I Internet Share/Teather?
7. Does it suffer from memory issues like a lot of WinMob devices do?
8. Can I use the phone as a memory stick like I can with WinMob devices?
9. Is there a Live Mesh client for Android?
10. Can they be flashed with diferent ROMS like Winmob devices?
With regards to Flash (mentioned above). My Winmob device - at least if it had enough ram! - can access my mates full flash website and show it (www.thehoggz.co.uk). I have previously performed some testing on an older G1 (?) with someone to find that Winmob (with full Flash 7) was by far the best at this, with Nokia next and finaly the G1. Now I understand that Flash clients are being re-written but they are not here yet. Does anyone have any experience of Android 2.0 and Flash, has it improved?
Appreciate that this is a long list but i'm so fed up with buying devices only to be let down continualy on what they claim to be able to do and can't. Please be honest, I'm really trying to get the right solution this time
I look forward to any helpfull answers!!! THANKYOU!
(just seen Orb's link to JKONTHERUN and so I will also now start reading this)
The answers to all your questions as far as I know are "yes" with the exception of 8 and 9 because I don't know. But I think you'll be better off getting an HD2 as using Android you will be relying on 3rd party software for your work a lot.
very promising, thanks!!!
8 and 9 could be serious issues for me, will have to think. Been looking around and the new Toshiba looks good.
Can't use HD2 as I need a hardware keyboard.
edit: You said yes to all but 8 and 9, so Android devices suffer memory issues like Winmob then?
First of all DO NOT buy a Toshiba, as every one of their devices in the past suffers a number of serious bugs. Plus you don't get XDA support at all.
Android does suffer from memory issues, if you run a lot of apps. But of course you can end unused apps from running in the backgroud anyway. And if memory availability is crucial to you, find a ROM without HTC's Sense UI.
And don't forget most modern (late-2009) phones have more memory than phones of 2008.
Actually I was being stupid - the answer to 8 is YES. The memory card can be mounted as a storage device.
Actually my Tosh G900 was excellent device.
Not bothered about HTC support specificaly, I have had nothing bad serious trouble with there devices - all three i've owned.
So, I can't plug the phone in to a laptop via a PC and tell the phone to act as a memory stick?
Monty Burns said:
So, I can't plug the phone in to a laptop via a PC and tell the phone to act as a memory stick?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course you can. Uses standard USB mass storage protocol. Note: I assume that you mean NVM rather than RAM when you say "memory". No device should ever use NVM as RAM.
As for this so-called memory "problem"... it is in fact, quite minor. Don't worry about what wywywywy says.
Android has a very cool feature for dealing with limited memory-- automatic kick-out of non-foreground applications.
There is NO NEED to kill programs that you aren't using.
If you need the extra memory, android will do that FOR you by killing off programs based on a set of priorities (some programs *need* to keep running, some programs are desirable to keep running, but of varying importance).
In other words, more memory is always better, but it handles it VERY smartly -- so you don't need to worry about it.
Just for reference with your M900, have you tried Daskalos' lite rom?
He's manages to squeeze 69mb out of the RAM.
Ben.
Yes mate, running the 69meg lite now but by the time you have installed spb shell (Be honest, the old today screen is sh*&) and a few other basic apps.... i'm down to 33meg free - fire up Opera and open the BBC home page and i'm out of ram.
How Acer could design such an awesome device and cripple it over such a cheap component is beyond my understanding.
lbcoder said:
......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds excellent. So, is 128meg plenty? Am I able to open webpages without issues (unlike WinMob, Opera 10b)? I'm sure the answer to the next question is "of course" but, is a device with 256 much more beneficial? Should I make this a priority?
Only Windows Mob devices can connect to Live Mesh as it's a Microsoft site. I'm sure there are similar "cloud" environments that Android can connect to though just can't think of any as I never found Live Mesh to be that useful.
M
Hi People,
Here is an extract from smartphone mag that has some bad news in it, It seems M$ is starting a fresh and non of your programs will run on WM7. Plus there will be no updates for any current phones, so I dont see much prospects for cooking WM7 that will be of any use for us. Anyway I shall let you read it yourself
Jay
Jim Karpen,
your Web Guide
Read New Windows Mobile Content Every Week day at Smartphonemag.com
Web Guide: Windows Phone 7 Won’t Run Old Apps, Won’t Work on Current Phones
Shocking news this past week about the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 Series. Not only will it not run current apps, but also current phones such as the forthcoming HTC HD2 from T-Mobile may not be upgradeable. This week, I'll point you to more information about this, as well as additional detail about Windows Phone 7 and videos of this software in action.
Current Phones Won't Run Windows Phone 7
windows Phone 7 Series Won't Run Current Apps
The other bit of news was somewhat expected, but still something of a shock: none of your current software will work on a Windows Phone 7 device. According to a post by a Microsoft executive, making a clean break from the past will allow the new phones to be as powerful and user-friendly as possible.
What does that mean? That the developers will need to rewrite their software to work on the new phones. The exec did say that Microsoft will continue to work with partners who plan to deliver Windows Mobile 6.5 devices, and that it will continue to support these products.
The big question is, Will developers bother to rewrite their software? Given that so much of the smartphone action is in the Android and iPhone arenas, they may simply choose to focus on those platforms rather than rewrite their software for Windows Phone 7. An indication of the declining interest in Microsoft's platform may be the recent announcement by Skype that they were pulling their Windows Mobile version of Skype and have ceased development of it.
It is known for quite some time, just say goodbye to our clients to finally kato no one wants their products, they are great clowns of silent men like this Seventh, very ugly and totally sure that will become famous shows blue screen, as gathered from XP
I am not a developer so I don't understand why it is so hard to receive updates on some android devices.
Today, particularly I am concerned with the ICS update . Why is it that even though TF meets all the hardware requirements it still can't receive ICS?
To a n average user like me this is like saying "we both have similar computers but Windows 7 won't work on yours and it's nothing do do with hardware".......
it is not the same at all. For windows computers all of the components are supported by their respective manufactures and all of those manufactures write the drivers for the operating system. By doing this you can install windows (or linux) on most platforms because of the cumulative support. In android there are many more steps. Most drivers have to be written by a single manufacturer which may get hardware from other manufactures but they do not provide software support for that hardware. writing those drivers takes some time and implementing them into each release of android as it changes the parameters it accepts ect. then each device has to be tested rather than just testing one part to make sure everything is in order then it goes through google who do even more checks to make sure that it is near perfect before it is released to the general public
So after playing with my Surface for 5 days now, it is obvious there is a lot of capability in the back end through the Desktop. II have networked printers, and drives at both home and office going, streaming content etc. It is very capable for what it is, way beyond any other Ipad and Android tablet out there. So it seems to me it is just a matter of time before some XDAer figures out a way to unleash it and possibly load other programs (non-RT) programs some way. We know the official MS word is no, but it seems to me it is a fully capable Win8 machine that just has some goierners on it and limited processing power, just waiting to be cracked.
Am I just dreaming?
I would love to see this happen. The one thing holding me back from purchasing one. I'd love a Windows 8 Pro version tablet at the Surface RT pricing but wouldn't we all...
I dont think rt can run x86 app properly. Because the cpu is not as good as x86 core. I am interested in porting rt to compatiable device such as tergra 2 and 3 pad.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
liu2002 said:
I dont think rt can run x86 app properly. Because the cpu is not as good as x86 core. I am interested in porting rt to compatiable device such as tergra 2 and 3 pad.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think it's necessarily about the Tegra being "as good" as an x86 - the issue is that you'd need an emulator, or the source for the x86 app which you'd then need to re-compile for ARM. I believe MS made a developer toolkit available that allows simpler conversion from x86 to ARM but it's still up to the app vendors to do it.
In theory, the same code could compile for both x86/64 and ARM (RT), but VS2012 will not allow you to compile an ARM desktop app. There is no legit way to write/compile a desktop app on RT. Its an arbitrary BS limitation put in place by MS. You cannot side load apps, everything must come through the MS store, RT enterprise being an exception... which doesn't help us. And the MS store will only offer Metro apps. MS office shows that's desktop apps are fully possible, albeit recoded/recompiled for ARM, but MS will not allow it. In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Skitals said:
In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you say that?
Because its not allowed, only metro style apps published through the app store are allowed. Even if you compile compatible desktop software, the OS won't run it. Its a closed sandbox.
At best we can hope for a "homebrew" community to compile open source software, and find some hacks to get it running.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Hello,
I’m a happy owner of the Surface RT and I just wanted to add my 2c.
I think that Metro UI is great for tablet, but lacks apps !
So I cannot understand why Microsoft didn’t include .Net on this platform ! I think the main goal and the first “Homebrew” must be recompilation of Mono for ARM. As this will allow us develop a lot of programs, quickly and using “good” tools (Visual )
I just started to study WinRT and I’m already hitting a lot of blocks (For instance, I cannot find a way to open Shared Socket ! So if any other app listen on 1900 port, I lose my SSDP discovery... )
But I think recompilation of Mono is definitely a way to go ! I think i’ll try it this week-end, if I have some time, but It’s sure I will not be able install on my surface As for now it seems to be impossible to enter Testing Mode on it.
Jurion
jurion said:
So I cannot understand why Microsoft didn’t include .Net on this platform !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think people seem to be missing something here (well, not just here, on other threads/forums.blogs too). MS have essentially (it’s really quite impressive) ported over the entire Windows OS to run on ARM – and this includes all of .NET v4 with supporting libraries/DLLs.
You only have to pop to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319 on your Surface RT to see – all the same libraries for the same version of .NET a x86 desktop seem to be there - including Linq, SQL, reflection etc.
Now, this could be really great news! I’d bet that it would be entirely possible for standard .NET applications (by standard, I mean programs that only use managed code and nothing legacy) to be reasonably easily recompiled to run on ARM - ideally as easyily as changing a drop-down!
Furthermore, this is all supported in Visual Studio, it’s just locked down a bit - I’ve been able to compile, with VS2012 (and a minor tweak to remove the ARM compile block) a simple command line EXE for ARM (using .NET calls – though only in C++ which is a shame). The problem is, as soon I open it on Surface, I get an error saying the ‘digital certificate’ couldn't be validated – a common issue which has a simple fix documented online. The catch... that the instructions to remove this block don’t work with secure boot enabled, and - at present - we can’t disable this on the Surface (on normal PCs this can be turned off in the bios).
So – the key to all this, is for MS to open it up (not impossible, but who knows if or when) or for someone to get round this secure boot/certificate requirement. I’m sure there’s some smart people on here with abilities to work on, and hopefully succeed in doing this. Even if people aren't able to work a way round this block, I'm hopefully that eventually MS may release some firmware update tools that someone can hack to switch off UEFI secure boot. Or perhaps someone at MS or a partner may leak some file/app/boot that unlocks this for dev/enterprise purposes.
I look forward to it happening!
T
Skitals said:
In theory, the same code could compile for both x86/64 and ARM (RT), but VS2012 will not allow you to compile an ARM desktop app. There is no legit way to write/compile a desktop app on RT. Its an arbitrary BS limitation put in place by MS. You cannot side load apps, everything must come through the MS store, RT enterprise being an exception... which doesn't help us. And the MS store will only offer Metro apps. MS office shows that's desktop apps are fully possible, albeit recoded/recompiled for ARM, but MS will not allow it. In an ideal world, RT would be a fully supported OS, and the likes of Adobe and others could release desktop apps for RT, but sadly it won't happen.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything doesn't have to come through the MS store, you can install applications that you build in Visual Studio 2012 for Windows Store, create an appx package and choose not to publish it in Windows Store. VS2012 then creates an appx package as well as a PowerShell script that you can run on Surface, accept security warning, get the developer's license on the device (it's free) and that's it!
It is fairly obvious why MS does not allow installation of "Desktop" apps on ARM tablets. Otherwise dev's would get lazy and just recompile desktop apps for ARM. The experience on a touch tablet would not be great on (unmodified) Desktop apps, hence Microsoft set this constraint on Windows RT in order to push dev's towards making a proper touch friendly app. The result is of course the lack of apps initially, but in the long run the benefits will be a greater experience as the apps would be optimized for touch.
Sure there are obvious downsides to this strategy, but the decision itself makes a lot of sense from a useability standpoint. You already read the complaints in reviews about "Office" not being Metro-style and unfriendly to touch. However this is naturally a decision due to time constraints, because MS would have also preferred to not include a desktop on RT. Office is the selling point now, to gravitate people towards RT and when there is enough demand, the touch friendly (Metro) apps will flow in eventually
Backflipping said:
I think people seem to be missing something here (well, not just here, on other threads/forums.blogs too). MS have essentially (it’s really quite impressive) ported over the entire Windows OS to run on ARM – and this includes all of .NET v4 with supporting libraries/DLLs.
You only have to pop to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319 on your Surface RT to see – all the same libraries for the same version of .NET a x86 desktop seem to be there - including Linq, SQL, reflection etc.
Now, this could be really great news! I’d bet that it would be entirely possible for standard .NET applications (by standard, I mean programs that only use managed code and nothing legacy) to be reasonably easily recompiled to run on ARM - ideally as easyily as changing a drop-down!
Furthermore, this is all supported in Visual Studio, it’s just locked down a bit - I’ve been able to compile, with VS2012 (and a minor tweak to remove the ARM compile block) a simple command line EXE for ARM (using .NET calls – though only in C++ which is a shame). The problem is, as soon I open it on Surface, I get an error saying the ‘digital certificate’ couldn't be validated – a common issue which has a simple fix documented online. The catch... that the instructions to remove this block don’t work with secure boot enabled, and - at present - we can’t disable this on the Surface (on normal PCs this can be turned off in the bios).
So – the key to all this, is for MS to open it up (not impossible, but who knows if or when) or for someone to get round this secure boot/certificate requirement. I’m sure there’s some smart people on here with abilities to work on, and hopefully succeed in doing this. Even if people aren't able to work a way round this block, I'm hopefully that eventually MS may release some firmware update tools that someone can hack to switch off UEFI secure boot. Or perhaps someone at MS or a partner may leak some file/app/boot that unlocks this for dev/enterprise purposes.
I look forward to it happening!
T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm, sorry my bad, didn't look enougth to find .Net assemblies.
As for open it for MS, may be, maaaay be it's the same scheme which they followed with Windows Phone 7.
No native developpment for 7.0 -- 7.8
But they open it for 8.0
May be they just want to force people developp Metro app to populate the store first.
So where's the best place to get one?
I'm looking into buying one very very soon, I found some on ebay for $585 with the cover, That sounds like a win to me. I wish QVC had it, That'd be lovely.
I'm praying we get a work around for all this, But still If the device isn't made for it, I can't be mad that it doesn't do it, That's like being angry that my car doesn't fly.
But it's such a tease, it worries me that I'll have an entire desktop, Sitting, Obselete, With nothing but Office, which I wont even use.
Can't_Live_Without_My_Evo said:
I'm looking into buying one very very soon, I found some on ebay for $585 with the cover, That sounds like a win to me. I wish QVC had it, That'd be lovely.
I'm praying we get a work around for all this, But still If the device isn't made for it, I can't be mad that it doesn't do it, That's like being angry that my car doesn't fly.
But it's such a tease, it worries me that I'll have an entire desktop, Sitting, Obselete, With nothing but Office, which I wont even use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is made for it. It has the full desktop, and the full desktop Office suite. Its a big tease. The whole "do more" campaign advertises you can "click in" and have full laptop productivity with touchpad and mouse/keyboard. Except the only software to take advantage of it is desktop IE and Office.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
First off, I wanted to say I posted a few threads about this thing here asking questions about stuff I needed to get it working in the way I'd like and I'd want to thank you because I have made a lot of progress in getting it to be what I'd like it to be. I also don't know if this is the best forum to post this report because it's neither a question nor necessarily a tutorial but rather a summary and description of work already done so far, and especially because this device, while it sure runs Android (very well!) does not fit into any of the categories on this site neatly.
The story so far
This post concerns my experience working with the ITX-3588J, a board released just a few months ago by the Chinese manufacturer Firefly (or T-Chip Intelligent Technology Co. Ltd, based in Zhongshan) that is in the coveted mini-ITX form factor which means it can actually fit into a small-size desktop computer case and indeed has enough compute power to theoretically - and perhaps not so theoretically! - function as an honest desktop system with an ARM processor: namely the - also very new - Rockchip RK3588 system-on-a-chip.
About two months ago, I was looking into acquiring a new kind of computer to replace my somewhat longer on the tooth x86 machine that would be compact, low-power, and easy to transport while also being a fully capable desktop. And I certainly didn't want Apple. I had seen some very small form x86 desktops before, but I also knew there were many boards - like Raspberry Pi - that featured the ARM processor. Not content with the Pi, which is still very weak for this application at least when compared against modern software, I wanted to see if there was something else by now in a similar vein, and when I saw this board I thought it was an amazing option, esp. given I have not yet found a peer. Many ARM single-board devices exist but this is the only one I've found so far that looks to be in a proper desktop form factor and sporting a processor powerful enough to work at that level.
So I got the board, a case, and - noting it had SATA ports - a cheap 250 GB SSD, and put it all together ... and fired it up! And to my surprise, it booted up Android! Which was a real shocker because I generally thought this'd be like another PC board, not having had much experience with this ecosystem beyond phones, so that it would just give the usual "OS not found" stuff. Nope - pre-loaded on the board. Very minimal, very bare-bones though, not even the Google Play and similar essentials required for a usable Android experience. Yet with the little bit I had, I couldn't help but notice it was extremely fluid, responsive, and snappy, moreso than my aging 2018 era x86 box. Moreover, it was very, very interesting (and exciting!) to see Android booted onto a full-size monitor screen like Linux or Microsoft Windows - and actually and surprisingly, to see that it didn't look and feel all that bad!
However, of course, I wanted more. First, I wanted a fully-featured installation of Android. Second, I wanted to run Linux on it - especially given that, a short while later, I found that the board manufacturers were offering a stock Ubuntu 20.04 to be installable to it. Although, in the early stages, I didn't know how to do this at all, and then soon after learned how to reflash the embedded MMC chip to change the OS. And I did so, trying the Ubuntu and finding it also very performant, but not liking either that it was not quite the newest version but also more that it was mutually exclusive with Android - so far.
And that would begin a long - and at many times frustrating, especially given how much information out there is not at all tuned to a device like this being pressed into this application - learning journey toward exploring topics as diverse as how ARM processors and SoCs work under the hood, U-Boot, kernel features, the Firefly-Rockchip developer kit - and having to essentially single-handedly discover many of that kit's ins and outs given there was pretty much no documentation - and more, ultimately leading to where I've got it to now.
What it can do at this point
And that is, right now, I have it sitting here, loaded up with the stock Android 12 and Ubuntu 20.04 - with the former on the eMMC and the latter on the SSD hard drive. On the Android side, Google Play is now loaded and functional, though Google Chrome is not (it crashes with a "Telephony is null" exception for some reason, which seems to suggest for some reason it's trying to act like it's on a phone but isn't). Zoom - an app that I really, really wanted to have (and why I wanted to keep Android around on it) - works and works smoother and cleaner than my 2018 x86 Linux clunker. On the Ubuntu side, though, things are not yet coming - mostly because of seeming inability to use U-Boot to boot from the SSD. I managed to install GRUB, and given that Firefly's generous board SDK provides the full U-Boot source code was able to recompile it with the necessary "bootefi" command enabled which is not present in stock, but nonetheless alas this U-Boot seems to have its SATA support bugged or incomplete, because it would crash immediately upon trying to initialize that subsystem.
Where I'd like to go with it
Obviously, full dual boot of Android and Ubuntu, so getting U-Boot to boot the GRUB resident on the hard drive, is the biggest issue so far, and that means investigating whatever is the problem (or not?) in its SATA subsystem. Getting Google Chrome working on Android is another important step. Moreover - though it would cost extra money that I do not have right now - there's the very interesting possibility, owing to the fact that it has a built in M.2 slot on the board, and alluded to in the title - that the device could be made to act as a cell phone. And finally, the possibility of upgrading to a newer version of Ubuntu (ideally 22.04) - however from what I know so far, it looks like this will have to wait because the stock Linux kernels do not currently support the RK3588 fully - though I'd suggest the Linux kernel developers really should take a look at the SDK that came with this thing because it has lots of code in it including for the kernel, all under GPL.
Final note
One of the most interesting things I've learned from this project, and mentioned earlier, is just how well Android seems to work as a desktop OS. While there have apparently been some attempts to port it to x86, this is perhaps one of the first devices that is desktop-workable and which runs it natively. And one of the things I find that's nice about it is that ironically, because all the apps are designed for small screens, when they are run on a very big screen (and this monitor is not "very big" even by today's monitor standards, being a used and earlier LCD type), they are extremely easy on the eyes and have minimal UI clutter when compared to a typical desktop app on most Linux WMs and on MS Windows.
If you want to know more about the details, or anything else, feel free to ask any questions you might have!
UPDATE:
I believe I may have found an easier way to dual-boot Linux with Android, and that consists of configuring a custom ROM that will put both kernels, and GRUB, on the board's eMMC, while the rootfs for both OSes is placed on the hard disk. Will be seeing how it works.
UPDATE:
I have almost completed the custom ROM! I have now both Android and at least the base system for Ubuntu 20.04 (Kernel 5.10.66) bootable with Android now storing user data on the hard drive; though I'm still running into some hardware initialization issues in the latter that are keeping me from actually installing the desktop system. With regard to the Ubuntu system, there is some interesting issue in that for some reason the provided SDK kernel, which I had to rebuild, seems to build more Android-like because it wants to look in "/vendor" for some things related seemingly to the networking facilities, and it is possible this is preventing me from bringing up wifi, which I need in order to download the rest of the system.
But lots of progress overall - it seems that a full-fledged ARM desktop running simultaneously Android and Ubuntu is within reach to be wrung from this board!
Ignore my request for an update in another post. Seems you like you moving along. I don't need dual boot, just a working Android 12 with GPlay and Chrome. Did you get Chrome to work?
mebalzer said:
Ignore my request for an update in another post. Seems you like you moving along. I don't need dual boot, just a working Android 12 with GPlay and Chrome. Did you get Chrome to work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Yeah, I want to say that I have pretty successfully gotten Android 12 working on it for sure, but Ubuntu is proving much more difficult due to graphics support issues, and I'm not sure if it will be possible until RK3588 is supported in the mainline Linux kernel tree which is still something under development. And yes! I got Chrome to work Everything works, actually - it's great as an Android system, though obviously Android is kinda funny to use as a desktop OS. I am wondering if I can't get a "pseudo" Linux using something like Linux Deploy in lieu of running it natively, at least until the kernel development catches up with this new processor.
(FWIW, I'm posting this post from that machine while it is running A12. )
Good to see someone else is interested in it, though. What are you planning on using yours for?
Insofar as getting Android 12 to work w/GApps - it depends on if you want to do it purely on the eMMC or you want to also put user data on an attached hard drive like I did. In either case, the best option, I feel, is to create a custom ROM - I could provide custom ROMs for it for download, but don't know because of Google's licensing conditions around the GApps and have heard of people getting in trouble with Google for distributing custom ROMs for phones that have GApps in them. You basically need to unpack the stock Android image, unpack the "super.img", then load the apps from a package like NikGApps into the "product" partition (NOT "oem" - that was a big mistake), then repack everything and flash to the eMMC again. You will need the board SDK from Firefly for all this as it has the custom ROM-packing and flashing tools.
Alternatively, it is possible to manually install the NikGApps GApps using the Android console - as it's a fully unlocked system, obtaining root access is trivial: just put it into Developer mode and you will find the root access in the "Developer options..." menu under "System".
Shimmy99 said:
Insofar as getting Android 12 to work w/GApps - it depends on if you want to do it purely on the eMMC or you want to also put user data on an attached hard drive like I did. In either case, the best option, I feel, is to create a custom ROM - I could provide custom ROMs for it for download, but don't know because of Google's licensing conditions around the GApps and have heard of people getting in trouble with Google for distributing custom ROMs for phones that have GApps in them. You basically need to unpack the stock Android image, unpack the "super.img", then load the apps from a package like NikGApps into the "product" partition (NOT "oem" - that was a big mistake), then repack everything and flash to the eMMC again. You will need the board SDK from Firefly for all this as it has the custom ROM-packing and flashing tools.
Alternatively, it is possible to manually install the NikGApps GApps using the Android console - as it's a fully unlocked system, obtaining root access is trivial: just put it into Developer mode and you will find the root access in the "Developer options..." menu under "System".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks I will keep this in mind. See my reply to you other reply on another post as well.
I would to run gplay as well please send me instruction the nikapps github doesnt say nothing