Samsung has posted a page for a Verizon Galaxy S5 Developer Edition on their U.S. online shop:
Samsung Galaxy S5 (Verizon), Charcoal Black Developer Edition
There's no release date or pricing listed yet, but it's good to know that it's coming.
Good to know that it is coming, however, it is very sad to know that no updates are provided to this phone.
Sure you can install whatever roms you want, however, if the carrier branded locked down that no boot loader bypasses are available then kiss any rom choices goodbye (save the international version roms) as no one will develop for it.
Goodbye s4 hello s5:laugh:
joderme said:
Good to know that it is coming, however, it is very sad to know that no updates are provided to this phone.
Sure you can install whatever roms you want, however, if the carrier branded locked down that no boot loader bypasses are available then kiss any rom choices goodbye (save the international version roms) as no one will develop for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you talking about roms built off of the retail version won't work for this because the retail bootloader would also be required? Is this true?
https://copy.com?r=cScoov
joderme said:
Good to know that it is coming, however, it is very sad to know that no updates are provided to this phone.
Sure you can install whatever roms you want, however, if the carrier branded locked down that no boot loader bypasses are available then kiss any rom choices goodbye (save the international version roms) as no one will develop for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most probably wouldn't develop for this anyway same with S3 D.E.
jackdubl said:
Are you talking about roms built off of the retail version won't work for this because the retail bootloader would also be required? Is this true?
https://copy.com?r=cScoov
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Elite49 said:
Most probably wouldn't develop for this anyway same with S3 D.E.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they can build roms for Carrier version they will work on Dev unit. Just no Safestrap required. Development will be dependent on if Safestrap or another bootloader bypass is made functional. All roms developed on S3 and S4 work on their Dev Editions. There is no difference in the device besides bootloader unlocked.
prdog1 said:
If they can build roms for Carrier version they will work on Dev unit. Just no Safestrap required. Development will be dependent on if Safestrap or another bootloader bypass is made functional. All roms developed on S3 and S4 work on their Dev Editions. There is no difference in the device besides bootloader unlocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still need someone to get all the modem stuff worked out--international ROMs are not really automatic. And likely no GE or AOSP. I have an MDK S4. Going to keep it for a while then later dater VZW.
Avoid it like the plague. Samsung never updated the S4 and never released a factory image. I would never buy another Samsung Dev edition phone again. Not worth the price. I get more mileage from Nexus 5 and moto x... Each at least half the price.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using xda app-developers app
Hopefully they will release the Odin files this time. ................
Sent from my SM-N900V using xda app-developers app
Wow! A developer version that nobody will get because no files are released.
Get this and you will never get an update....
Come one Verizon, What is the point of this!
Sup Baja... thanks for the Note 3 roms.
bajasur said:
Hopefully they will release the Odin files this time. ................
Sent from my SM-N900V using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
will never happen because of how developer editions are made. they are a waste of money no updates are possible each aboot is signed with the device key to "unlock it" and that can only be done at samsung, so basically no way to update it without loosing the dev edition status and unlocked bootloader.
BeansTown106 said:
will never happen because of how developer editions are made. they are a waste of money no updates are possible each aboot is signed with the device key to "unlock it" and that can only be done at samsung, so basically no way to update it without loosing the dev edition status and unlocked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly......confused on why they are still referring to these as "developer editions"...... :banghead:
Sent from my SM-N900V using xda app-developers app
bajasur said:
Exactly......confused on why they are still referring to these as "developer editions"...... :banghead:
Sent from my SM-N900V using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to make money off people who strictly wanna use aosp i guess?
at this point if u want to get a s5 that u can use for roms etc
SM-G900R4 (US Cellular)
SM-G900T (T-Mobile US)
SM-G900P (Sprint)
SM-G900T1 (Metro PCS)
all have unlocked bootloaders put your $$ where your mouth is and lets stop supporting verizon
PSA: dont buy locked devices and expect them to be rootable/moddable because the time will come when the devs get tired of it.
BeansTown106 said:
will never happen because of how developer editions are made. they are a waste of money no updates are possible each aboot is signed with the device key to "unlock it" and that can only be done at samsung, so basically no way to update it without loosing the dev edition status and unlocked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the GS4 dev edition, I run custom roms, I keep the radios up to date and it works like a charm. I have no issues with it at all. I am running HD15 at the moment and it is amazing. No reboots. I am not really seeing a need for an update at this point.
I have a friend who is running 4.4.2 roms on his GS4 Dev and also has absolutely no problems.
I am not seeing it but perhaps in the future it will need an update but at that point I will probably have moved on to something else.
Firemedic said:
I have the GS4 dev edition, I run custom roms, I keep the radios up to date and it works like a charm. I have no issues with it at all. I am running HD15 at the moment and it is amazing. No reboots. I am not really seeing a need for an update at this point.
I have a friend who is running 4.4.2 roms on his GS4 Dev and also has absolutely no problems.
I am not seeing it but perhaps in the future it will need an update but at that point I will probably have moved on to something else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
s4 isnt bad but note 3 is there is almost no way to run a 4.4 rom with the 4.3 bootloader on the note3 because of how they implemented the dtb.img in the kernel and s5 for sure will have the dtb.img system intact like note 3
BeansTown106 said:
to make money off people who strictly wanna use aosp i guess?
at this point if u want to get a s5 that u can use for roms etc
SM-G900R4 (US Cellular)
SM-G900T (T-Mobile US)
SM-G900P (Sprint)
SM-G900T1 (Metro PCS)
all have unlocked bootloaders put your $$ where your mouth is and lets stop supporting verizon
PSA: dont buy locked devices and expect them to be rootable/moddable because the time will come when the devs get tired of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sadly this isn't going to work as altruistic of an idea that it may be.
Enthusiasts are such a small percentage of the population... Even if we do buy devices that are on networks that allow unlocked bootloaders that % will be small. They won't even notice something even if all enthusiasts switched. Phones like the SGS5 and the iPhone 5s will still sell in massive numbers in the US despite being locked down. Most folks don't really care or are too lazy to delve into the custom realm.
The devs are all we have in some instances, especially when a user likes the hardware, despite the anal nature of the carrier and/or manufacturer.
I'd like to think devs aren't taking money from Samsung and others to give up their exploits but unfortunately money makes the world go round.
I posted this in another Dev S5 thread, take a look: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=52430711&postcount=33
Samsung's developer program is horrible!!!! Looking for a Dev device with support? Go either Moto or HTC!
BeansTown106 said:
will never happen because of how developer editions are made. they are a waste of money no updates are possible each aboot is signed with the device key to "unlock it" and that can only be done at samsung, so basically no way to update it without loosing the dev edition status and unlocked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure that the dev edition signatures are hashed with the CID. That's how they get each device to have a unique key. Also, did you guys notice that there is no ExtCSD accessible on MSM8974/Note3 and newer devices? The RPMB happens to be the same size... I am wondering what would happen if we flipped the MMC_BOOT_PART_ACC bit to 0x3 (enable R/W RPMB), or enable R/W access to mmcblk0boot0 and 1. There's definitely something unique about these developer edition devices and how they utilize features of JEDEC standard. Again, it's sort of useless to know the signature is hashed with the CID without having the key to hash them with... but as far as I can tell, that hashing is all done on the device... I'm recompiling mmc_utils source to include some commands that shouldn't be messed around with (thanks @Hashcode) all in the name of science.
UPDATE: Have you guys ever seen the partition layout for these devices?
Code:
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0: 31.2 GB, 31268536320 bytes
1 heads, 16 sectors/track, 3816960 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16 * 512 = 8192 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/block/mmcblk0p1 1 3816960 30535679+ ee EFI GPT
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p1: 15 MB, 15728640 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 480 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
[B] Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/block/mmcblk0p1p1 ? 12158374 29994462 570754815+ 72 Unknown
Partition 1 has different physical/logical beginnings (non-Linux?):
phys=(357, 116, 40) logical=(12158373, 2, 5)
Partition 1 has different physical/logical endings:
phys=(357, 32, 45) logical=(29994461, 2, 3)
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p1p2 ? 2635774 32886216 968014120 65 Unknown
Partition 2 has different physical/logical beginnings (non-Linux?):
phys=(288, 115, 43) logical=(2635773, 3, 3)
Partition 2 has different physical/logical endings:
phys=(367, 114, 50) logical=(32886215, 0, 2)
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p1p3 ? 29216898 59467339 968014096 79 Unknown
Partition 3 has different physical/logical beginnings (non-Linux?):
phys=(366, 32, 33) logical=(29216897, 3, 10)
Partition 3 has different physical/logical endings:
phys=(357, 32, 43) logical=(59467338, 1, 9)
Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p1p4 ? 1 56831664 1818613248 d Unknown
Partition 4 has different physical/logical beginnings (non-Linux?):
phys=(372, 97, 50) logical=(0, 0, 1)
Partition 4 has different physical/logical endings:
phys=(0, 10, 0) logical=(56831663, 3, 16)
Partition 4 does not end on cylinder boundary[/B]
Partition table entries are not in disk order
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p10: 10 MB, 10485760 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 320 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p10 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p11: 14 MB, 14680064 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 448 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p11 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p12: 3 MB, 3145728 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 96 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p12 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p13: 3 MB, 3145728 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 96 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p13 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p14: 11 MB, 11534336 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 352 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p14 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p15: 13 MB, 13631488 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 416 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p15 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p16: 13 MB, 13631488 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 416 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p16 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p17: 7 MB, 7330816 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 223 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p17 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p18: 3 MB, 3145728 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 96 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p18 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p19: 0 MB, 1024 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 0 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p19 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p2: 60 MB, 60227584 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 1838 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
[B]
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/block/mmcblk0p2p1 ? 12158374 29994462 570754815+ 72 Unknown
Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p2p2 ? 2635774 32886216 968014120 65 Unknown
Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p2p3 ? 29216898 59467339 968014096 79 Unknown
Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary
/dev/block/mmcblk0p2p4 ? 1 56831664 1818613248 d Unknown
Partition 4 does not end on cylinder boundary[/B]
Partition table entries are not in disk order
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p20: 0 MB, 8192 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 0 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p20 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p21: 8 MB, 8388608 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 256 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p21 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p22: 9 MB, 9437184 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 288 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p22 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p23: 2843 MB, 2843738112 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 86784 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p23 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p24: 1073 MB, 1073741824 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 32768 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p24 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p25: 27.1 GB, 27158101504 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 828799 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p25 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p3: 0 MB, 524288 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 16 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p3 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p4: 0 MB, 32768 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 1 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p4 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p5: 0 MB, 32768 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 1 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p5 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p6: 2 MB, 2097152 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 64 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p6 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p7: 0 MB, 524288 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 16 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p7 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p8: 0 MB, 524288 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 16 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p8 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p9: 10 MB, 10485760 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 320 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0p9 doesn't contain a valid partition table
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0rpmb: 0 MB, 524288 bytes
4 heads, 16 sectors/track, 16 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 64 * 512 = 32768 bytes
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0rpmb doesn't contain a valid partition table
I am running 4.4.2 TW and still on the 4.3 bootloader.
Thanks to the leak we got or else ot would not be possible.
I agree tho Samsungs Developer Edition is a joke. However I will continue to buy them since I purchase my device out right to keep unlimited data. At least this way I am unlocked and can root right off the bat opposed to waiting for a root method....just sayin. If the new update is worthy of taking then I can decide to take it and turn the device into a locked retail at my discretion.
I will say 4.4.2 is not a big improvement over 4.3 other then download to ext. Sd works again, but I could live without something like that to keep root and stay unlocked.
markwebb said:
Avoid it like the plague. Samsung never updated the S4 and never released a factory image. I would never buy another Samsung Dev edition phone again. Not worth the price. I get more mileage from Nexus 5 and moto x... Each at least half the price.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly!
joderme said:
Sadly this isn't going to work as altruistic of an idea that it may be.
Enthusiasts are such a small percentage of the population... Even if we do buy devices that are on networks that allow unlocked bootloaders that % will be small. They won't even notice something even if all enthusiasts switched. Phones like the SGS5 and the iPhone 5s will still sell in massive numbers in the US despite being locked down. Most folks don't really care or are too lazy to delve into the custom realm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He didint say he was going to shut Verizon down... He said stop supporting them.
Related
Preview of Defy running Sense 2.0 (android 2.2)
I will probably get a DEFY soon, and am thinking of porting my milestone release of MotoFroyoSense for this model..
so the question is, if there is any interest in having Sense on DEFY?
it will probably lack the Bluetooth functionality, as the handling is too hard to port for milestone hardware. but otherwise check the milestone thread, you get more details there...
I guess the Rosie launcher reload totally dissappear here, when we got 512MB memory to work with, which should help out.
i don't know partition sizes, so how much space is free on the different partitions depends on the layout, Sense was a 400MB+ release on htc desire Z
update: 23-jan-2011
I got hold of a defy, and managed so far to get it ported, so phone + wifi works...
its based on the 2.2 kernel (chinese kernel) + HTC DesireZ
ill keep this updated until its ready for release...
update: 23-jan-2011 update2
I read that defy do not normally get 2000+ in quadrant scores, so i thought i would make a brief preview of the startup + really quick slider of menu + benchmarking.
My guess is that it would make many people happy (although personally I need bluetooth).
On http://simply-android.com/ HandlerExploit published this partition table:
Code:
major minor #blocks name alias
179 32 1912832 mmcblk1
179 33 128 mmcblk1p1 unknown (mbr? mbmloader?)
179 34 512 mmcblk1p2 unknown (mbm?)
179 35 512 mmcblk1p3 unknown (mbmbackup?)
179 36 1 mmcblk1p4 unknown
179 37 512 mmcblk1p5 unknown (bploader? ebr?)
179 38 512 mmcblk1p6 unknown (cdt?)
179 39 4096 mmcblk1p7 pds
179 40 512 mmcblk1p8 lbl
179 41 512 mmcblk1p9 lbl_backup
179 42 1024 mmcblk1p10 logo
179 43 2048 mmcblk1p11 sp
179 44 512 mmcblk1p12 devtree
179 45 512 mmcblk1p13 devtree_backup
179 46 4096 mmcblk1p14 bpsw
179 47 8192 mmcblk1p15 boot
179 48 8192 mmcblk1p16 recovery
179 49 14336 mmcblk1p17 cdrom
179 50 512 mmcblk1p18 misc
179 51 512 mmcblk1p19 cid
179 52 4096 mmcblk1p20 kpanic
179 53 334848 mmcblk1p21 system
179 54 512 mmcblk1p22 prek
179 55 512 mmcblk1p23 pkbackup
179 56 204800 mmcblk1p24 cache
179 57 1319936 mmcblk1p25 userdata
179 0 15558144 mmcblk0
179 1 15557120 mmcblk0p1
Maybe it is of use.
Sense on defy would be awesome. Hope that you will do the trick and port it, and i think many other people would appreciate this too.
That will be insanely good if it ever works stable. Very interested in having more languages too.
Simplestas said:
That will be insanely good if it ever works stable. Very interested in having more languages too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
- so defy suffers the same problem as milestone stock fw? only uk, france, etc? 4-5 langs?
- what about radio/baseband drivers, are those also an issue for users? would one image require patching with different baseband drivers? (havent followed defy threads much yet)
anyways ill find out in a weeks time i think...
When i got something stable running, ill probably post it, if i find it acceptable..
Great news. Keep us posted.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Sense on the defy is not for me, but any new Dev on the scene is good
I don't have a Defy either but the essentials I can glean are:
- The same folder on the Milestone and Defy is responsible for whether the 3G bands match the hardware or not. There is a "3GFix" floating around that aligns the device either with the radio files from an 850/AWS/2100 or 900/2100 Defy as appropriate, and can be used after flashing with a "wrong-radio" SBF.
- There is a nandroid backup now floating around which corresponds to the Chinese 2.2 firmware - however it's highly Blurred and de-Googled (kind of the opposite of what everyone seems to want around here!). In any case, this provides you with a 2.2 kernel to work around.
I think that FroyoSense for Defy would be great - *but* - what many people here would love to see first is a fully functional, de-Blurred, properly-Googled 2.2 ROM. Either as close to stock as possible, or Cyanogen-style, or maybe even "NinjaBlur" since it's relatively unobtrusive. If you can perfect that first, you'll get a lot of gratitude I'm sure =)
Would love Sense runnin' on the Defy.
Will Sensen then work properly on the Defy? I mean without jerking etc?
Sense is by far the best Android interface!
cmstlist said:
I think that FroyoSense for Defy would be great - *but* - what many people here would love to see first is a fully functional, de-Blurred, properly-Googled 2.2 ROM. Either as close to stock as possible, or Cyanogen-style, or maybe even "NinjaBlur" since it's relatively unobtrusive. If you can perfect that first, you'll get a lot of gratitude I'm sure =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
? don't defy come with a 2.2 kernel and MotoBlur? i must read up on the defy.. i thought defy kernel and Blur was similar to the Milestone2 edition?
but making a clean google edition from droid phone should be an easy one?
I think i will first try out my goal, which is sense (dare not say the easy ones like stock android is no fun )
DunkDream said:
Will Sensen then work properly on the Defy? I mean without jerking etc?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
read my MotoFroyoSense thread. I think becides BT, it was a nice port, if you ignore the rosie reload that was a major due to only 256MB memory.
Can you keep the music player on the stock moto defy? that would be great
Dexter_nlb said:
? don't defy come with a 2.2 kernel and MotoBlur? i must read up on the defy.. i thought defy kernel and Blur was similar to the Milestone2 edition?
but making a clean google edition from droid phone should be an easy one?
I think i will first try out my goal, which is sense (dare not say the easy ones like stock android is no fun )
read my MotoFroyoSense thread. I think becides BT, it was a nice port, if you ignore the rosie reload that was a major due to only 256MB memory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Defy comes with only 2.1 Eclair (plus Blur)! The only version that has been released with 2.2 so far is in China but that ROM is pretty messed up.
cmstlist said:
The Defy comes with only 2.1 Eclair (plus Blur)! The only version that has been released with 2.2 so far is in China but that ROM is pretty messed up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks, i am surprised to hear that.. ill check it out when i have it..
Yeah, it seems that Motorola doesn't take this phone very seriously...
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
If this phone have support from Motorola, will be a killer device!!
The truth is that the support will never come..
We have to find a way to unlock completely this device.
Sent from my MOTO Defy
demolition23 said:
We have to find a way to unlock completely this device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
based on my 1yr with milestone + hearing all ms users discuss it, i doubt it will ever come true, as the locking mechanism is in the hardware and needs physical board changes to break the fuse.
unless the RSA key is found found this one as its currently been running on milestone to find the key, but when is the q.
And the US Droid doesnt have this locking mechanism in the hardware?
strahlstrom said:
And the US Droid doesnt have this locking mechanism in the hardware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no. RSA is disabled and fuse is not enabled.
i think it had to do with Google was too quick getting the model out on the market.
How is capable and brave enough ??
http://www.uchobby.com/index.php/2007/05/05/read-embedded-flash-chips/
demolition23 said:
How is capable and brave enough ??
http://www.uchobby.com/index.php/2007/05/05/read-embedded-flash-chips/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as i understand the IRC discussions, its not in the nand they need to fix anything in, its the omap chipset which offers the protection, so writing to the nand is not an issue, but writing the right encryption key is.
Hey guys,
I just got my asus transformer 32 GB. I thought it had 1GB RAM available but under settings -> applications, it indicated 176 MB used and 378 MB free.
Am I missing something or is only around 550 MB ram available to use? Android Assistant app says it has 746,100 KB of mem to use though...
Thanks
hope your transformer has been good to you so far
My 16gb also shows only 550 roughly. Maybeits a honeycomb bug?
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
[ 0.000000] Memory: 744MB = 744MB total
[ 0.000000] Memory: 745244k/745244k available, 303332k reserved, 106496K highmem
745244k+303332k=1024MB
If you had less than 1GB, the device would probably not boot, as the kernel command line would probably not work with that configuration.
256MB reserved for the GPU?
I recently bought a 16gb SD card and its only showing 14 gigs. I know when you buy an sd card you won't get all of the space, but I've never bought one with 2 gigs missing. I was wondering if there was any way to get the full capacity?
Sent from my SGH-T769 using xda app-developers app
If your phone is reporting 14.8 gb, then you have your "16gb" because that is about 16 billion bytes.
Sent from my Polaroid Tablet using Tapatalk 2
tronmech said:
If your phone is reporting 14.8 gb, then you have your "16gb" because that is about 16 billion bytes.
Sent from my Polaroid Tablet using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't follow, it says total capacity for the SD card is 14.8 gb. Shouldn't it be 16 or at least high 15's?
Sent from my SGH-T769 using xda app-developers app
my 32 gig card shows as 27.1 gig...
Sent from my SGH-T769 using xda app-developers app
Take it easy, man !
1024KB = 1MB, and 1024MB = 1Gb.
Thinking again, 16Gb = 1024MB x 16 = 16384MB, but it's very odd, and the manufacturer don't want odd, so the manufacturer decided like this: 1000MB = 1Gb ( 16Gb = 16000MB ) and thus will lead to a lack of numbers ( when the true is "16gb = 16384MB" )
If your phone is reporting 14.8GB, just because your phone ( and every smartphone, HDD, USB, etc. ) memory is calculated by the Manufacturer ( Kingston, SeaGate, etc. ), and by Byte units. Don't worry man.
standards were set back in the day (when the loss was negligible). When working with kilobyte size hard drives. for instance, a 5 KB drive back then was actually just 5000 bytes. which, in reality is 4.88 KB (only a loss of 122 bytes, no biggie, right?)
in today's standard, its still measured the same way. a gigabyte is measured as 1,000,000,000 bytes (equaling 0.93 GB). literally, a gigabyte drive SHOULD be 1,073,741,824 bytes.
So, lets look at you 16 GB sd card... by industry standards, its actually 16,000,000,000 bytes. which is 15,625,000 KB, which is 15,258.79 MB, which is 14.9 GB (take 16,000,000,000, divide by 1024, divide that by 1024, and divide that by 1024).
Long story short, literal KB is 1024 bytes and they're being meausred as 1000 bytes. you're losing 24 bytes for every kilobyte
BIBUBO BCJ said:
Take it easy, man !
1024KB = 1MB, and 1024MB = 1Gb.
Thinking again, 16Gb = 1024MB x 16 = 16384MB, but it's very odd, and the manufacturer don't want odd, so the manufacturer decided like this: 1000MB = 1Gb ( 16Gb = 16000MB ) and thus will lead to a lack of numbers ( when the true is "16gb = 16384MB" )
If your phone is reporting 14.8GB, just because your phone ( and every smartphone, HDD, USB, etc. ) memory is calculated by the Manufacturer ( Kingston, SeaGate, etc. ), and by Byte units. Don't worry man.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get it it now. Thanks! I was pretty confused lol
Sent from my SGH-T769 using xda app-developers app
Hi everyone,
As I'm pretty hesitating to acquire the brand new Nokia Lumia 720 phone I would ask you :
- Do you think 512 MB RAM is enough to support WP 8 and enjoy some pretty games ?
- How long do you think 512 MB RAM will be enough to support that OS ? 1 year ? 2 years ?
Cheers.
hello xda,
i was lokking to buy some nfc tags and was looking at a chart at http://rapidnfc.com/which_nfc_chip
and it seens like the NTAG216 is way better than the NTAG213, but i see more people on amazon buy the 213 more than the 216.
which would be better?
any diffrences other than the memory?
Figured it out. Ntag213 has bout 123 bytes of data. Ntag216 has bout 888 bytes.
I went with the 216. The only difference is memory. Hit thanks if this helped anyone!
Phurkus said:
Figured it out. Ntag213 has bout 123 bytes of data. Ntag216 has bout 888 bytes.
I went with the 216. The only difference is memory. Hit thanks if this helped anyone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I confirm: the only difference between Ntag213 and Ntag216 is memory.
Ntag213 has 144 bytes available, while Ntag216 has 888 bytes.
Both chips support password-protection, scan counter and UID ASCII mirroring.