Related
Hello there.
I'm a new Archos 101 16GB User having a mixed experience.
I feel that what I've got has huge potential, but just isn't being fulfilled - don't know if anyone else feels that.
I've come straight to tablets from netbooks and an iPhone, and have tried not to have any preconceived notions about how iPad sets the bar for these devices, although it does seem to be the case.
I'm finding, knowing very little about Android, that manufacturers have apparently rushed to force-fit a phone OS in a bigger package, which in respect of certain features makes the A101 seem like a giant (largeprint) smartphone. An example of this is the way in which the small, dainty iPhone-worthy icons for Apps can only be laid out on the 'desktop' panes with massive margins of space between them because the Android system seems to rigidly adhere to strict grid patterns for layout when really what users in this day and age want is user-definable pixel-perfect precise placement of elements. Of course, even iPhone is lacking this configurability.
Anyway, I'm currently trying to overcome my disappointment with the UI and the usability and consistency of desktops across horizontal and vertical orientations (Beautiful Widgets look 'OK' in portrait layout, and fugly in horizontal orientation), indeed the feeling that while what I wanted was the unified visual goodness of a WindowsMobile 7 type platform (or indeed the style brought by both HTC and third party developers (SPB?) to WinMo6, or indeed the carefully tuned visual loveliness of some of the HTC Android skins (Sense?) what I've actually got is a pretty clunky and grumpy Linux build that doesn't play well with its own software applications.
This is only a seventy two hour evaluation so far.
I've been looking at benchmarking, and have been led to Quadrant.
So I've got a batch of results, and I'm wondering if anyone cares to compare results and then compare notes.
I've already wiped and reinstalled the fresh FroYo firmware on the device, and am using gApps4 from these forums. I've populated with some apps and such, and had very unsatisfying attempts to switch from the stock Launcher (LauncherPro and ADW) as well as attempting to find usability in QuickDeskPro, mostly to no avail.
So in this 'stock' but loaded with apps state, Quadrant gives me a result of 780.
Then I've rooted with z4root and run SetCPU to give me 1000mhz on demand, and Quadrant gives me a result of 933.
Since then I've used SetCPU to give me 1000mhz on the 'performance' (non-scaled) setting and I get a result of 974.
With people in various forums talking about Archos Internet Tablet devices running Froyo giving them up to 1200 under Quadrant, I'm wondering what I'm doing wrong or lacking?
The 1200 scores you are talking about came from beta software and not the release software. Something was changed in the release version that brought Quadrant scores back down to those of 2.1. Don't read to much in to Quadrant scores though as they don't really affect real world use.
As for apps, the main issue is screen size and resolution. Many apps were not written with a resolution of 1024X600 in mind. So they don't scale very well. Beautiful Widgets is one of those. Once more developers become tablet aware and as Google increases compatibility with tablets this issue will go away.
The Android home screen is what you make it. There are other launcher, as you mentioned, that can be more customized however, there is no real theming that can be done on the 101 until it is rooted. This is the same for all Android devices unless of course you get a phone from HTC or one of the other OEMs that add their own theme to Android.
I think your main issue is that you know very little about Android and you are expecting it to be as evolved as iOS is even though it hasn't been around as long. New version of Android are coming that will be prettier and more tablet friendly but it will take a little time for it to be perfected.
with another beta beta firmware
the score is 1313
cajl said:
with another beta beta firmware
the score is 1313
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
any rumors regarding the release date?
About the same scores here. Topping out around 1000 in quadrant and a bit over 13 in Linpack.
Not sure about your problems installing launcherpro and adw, but I would try one or both again. The stock browser is horrendous in comparison (laggy, takes much longer swipes to see action, etc).
czesiu said:
any rumors regarding the release date?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the A5A last year they gave us one on 14 Dec and another on 24 Dec.
Allen
AllenPapapetrou said:
and another on 24 Dec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
crazy Archos devs
no firmware the friday
cajl said:
no firmware the friday
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
?
________________
I get 820 on a temp-rooted archos 101 8GB with 1GHz set by set cpu.
Appearently the H264-coding takes much too long... my htc desire takes a fraction of a second to pass this test while the archos takes several seconds (20+). I read in another thread that the hardware isn't supported yet by Android-API on the Archos, which will be changed in the future, i presume.
Another glitch: The second 3D-test is much slower than on the Desire (7fps compared to 25), with some errors on the moon (black triangles). Perhaps the OpenGLS-driver is faulty in some way. The first 3D-test, however, shows 3-5 frames more per second than the Desire (clocked at 1152 MHz).
Thanks for the input, guys. I'm sure you all know how comforting, and useful it is to be able to geek out on a forum, compare stories and get tips.
BlazingWolf, I'm certain that you're right. Android is entirely new to me other than a quick fiddle (ooh-err) with a Sammy GTab in a branch of PCWorld with a snotty little elf breathing down my neck to see if he could play games on it.
My big mistake in starting to experiment with this device was that I came at it from an iPhone background, expecting to just load up a device with apps from an app store and watch as it sings, dances and performs tricks for me.
I'm back down to earth with a bump (and not in a bad way) because of the greater openness, some would say 'fragmentation' of the Android platform which creates a scenario similar to that in the PC world where we can have any one of a number of preconfigured devices using specific but sometimes unique chipset combinations, with an array of OS's and software that can be installed on them.
I'm sure one day Android will mature to the place where we begin to see such harmony on the software front end in such a way as the hardware backend becomes irrelevant.
My first 72 hours with the device were bitty. I was expecting these instant results and instant satisfaction, and progress didn't really start to be achieved until I'd wiped the A101 and reinstalled 2.2 from scratch. That's a daunting task, especially to a casual user who might buy this off the shelf. Of course, I'm sure Archos are already looking at that and working to fix it so that the product is good to go from the off.
I'm warming very quickly to the A101. I want to like it. I still have an A504wifi which has only ever been used as a much-loved, if clunky looking and with a sucky interface, portable video player, which has had a great deal of use. So I've been excited about the A101 for a while.
And as a device it is an odd one to classify. The inevitable comparison with the iPad is not necessarily as clear cut as it seems. We have to be utilitarian, sometimes, in looking at these things. The iPad fulfils a multiple of tasks, like the Archos, and it does it within a tightly regulated and strictly defined 'controlled' environment which pushes constantly at 'parity' across all contemporary devices (the OS version for example). This gives us an elegant, reliable but inflexible interface, the trade-off for which is the relative safety of the apps in the app store. The Archos, on the other hand, has a less than elegant interface, is suffering from the issues of platform fragmentation and the remote relationship between the OS developer and the hardware manufacturer, has an App Store full of garbage that doesn't work properly but might get fixed one day, and takes a lot of 'taming' as an all-round package in order to get consistent and satisfying results. That said, the nature of the more open platform affords more opportunities, akind to jailbreaking the iDevices, in successfully customising the device to complete satisfaction, and as already said assuming the OS platform is sufficiently developed to catch up with these new 'tablet' formats, especially the larger screen varieties, we could see something really special and really refined happening.
Where the Archos succeeds, however, is that it is clearly a better platform for at least two of the intended functions of the iPad. We've got a better movie player, capable of working with more formats, with instant HDMI output, and with a proper widescreen display instead of the iPad's nearly 4:3 widescreen letterbox squinty vision. We've also got a better e-reader than the Apple ArmBreaker. OK, the bezel on the iPad is easier to grip single-handed than the Archos's much thinner, but much more elegant design, but this is a device I can sit in an armchair with and actually fall asleep while still holding the thing (I know... it happened). With an iPad, I have to keep shuffling position because the thing is so dang heavy.
The Archos seems to be only a few shades shy of perfect, as far as a hardware platform goes.
Granted, Tegra2 might be fun. And definately the low amount of RAM is an inexplicable and bizarre mistake. Plus we could have done with a 32Gb storage option. Oh, and a more easily viewable screen would be nice.
But as I tweek the thing, and accept the failings of OS and softwares, while anticipating future fixes, I'm really getting to like the little fella. I just need a really nice case to cart it around in, and a decent size memory card so I can store more, and I suspect that if someone can make a permanent root happen, that will pave the way to things like 'Startup Managers' so I can stop some of these apps auto loading when I don't need them to.
A question, though... is there any reason why the MicroSD capacity is listed as being limited to 32GB? Is that an actual capacity ceiling, or is it just the number that was most commonly available or tested at the time? Is the hardware limited to 32Gig or is it Android which is limited? Can the Archos 101 'scale' as MicroSD capacities get larger, or are we literally stuck with 32GB?
I've had no issues with build quality, possibly because I don't expect it to be as solid as an iPad, being a cheaper price and different materials. I've never really had much history of busting my devices with rough treatment or accidents, and even my 'expensive' iPhone 3GS has experienced the not-uncommon 'natural' phenomena of cracks appearing in the back casing around the dock port.
One thing I did notice is that when the A101 first arrived fresh from FedEx the box was freezing cold and so was the device, and when I unpackaged it, the top edge of the device (top of the screen when held in landscape) appeared to be quite significantly convex in shape, arced, not separated from the glass in any way, but definitely bulging. I did a lot of pressing back down on the bulge and letting the device get to room temperature before this 'bulge' became minimal. It is there ever so slightly even now, but doesn't appear to be putting any pressure or distortion on the screen.
Oh, and I think it is just the viewing angle issue, but when I hold the device in portrait to browse long pages or long lists, it almost appears as if the screen itself is convex, and I tend to tilt it back and forth to change the viewing angle on each section of the screen. The screen could definately have been executed better, and I don't think it would have raised the price too significantly.
Any other tips for an A101 n00b would be greatly welcomed.
32GB is atm the maximum you can build a sd to.
The std doesn't give more.
There is a new spec by sony that has more, but it seems not compatible.
I'm not sure if you're interested, but my Samsung Galaxy S used to only do about 900 on the Quadrant benchmark with Android 2.1, it was laggy and slow and really seemed a bit disappointing! Then came Froyo! My oh my, what a difference, unbelievable! It's snappy, touch, and it's there, spin, and it spins, breath, and it feels you! And, it also performs excellently in a Quandrant test now, usually in excess of 1700, even out performs most Nexus One phones I think.
It's absolutely blown me away that a simple software upgrade could entirely change a user experience so much! Battery life has also improved dramatically, at times giving me upto 12 hours or more with general use (regular texting plus photos etc). Which is really great for a 1500mAh battery.
So, I wouldn't give up. Froyo is a really smooth incarnation of Android, and future releases will no doubt get even better. It's exciting seeing what having a company as powerful as Google, backing an opensource project like Android can achieve.
While Microsoft and other companies are focusing purely on developing products from a financial profitability standpoint, Google seems to be able to focus more on simply developing a really excellent product.
I think the biggest 'downside' to Android is that numerous companies overload it with bloatware and don't optomise it enough for their hard ware. There is maybe just a general lack of understanding on the importance of making Android work WITH not against the hardware it's on.
Keep the faith though, have a play around with it and I'm sure eventually things will improve for you, otherwise, if you're really disappointed just go and buy a Samsung Galaxy tab or something similar! Samsung does a really good job, even though they take a looooooong time for updates!
Just ran quadrant, score was 1380. Gapps5 launcher pro plus non root.
2500 with urukdroid build
Recently ive been wondering why android is so different compared to windows?
I mean, although android 2.2, 2.3, (2.4) is out and running, only a small percentage of the phones actually got the upgrade, and most of em are still running 2.1 or lower for the time being, so what is the point in having a new firmware available if you cant run it on your phone anyway ?
Android is just a firmware right ? So why cant it be like windows, when there is a new version, no matter what specs or brand of PC, you just install and your up and running... And phones are just like small computers right ?
So why doenst google make android just as compatible as windows, and as soon as a new version comes out, we just install it and were good to go ? I know this is sort or less the whole point of it being open source, but there has to be a solution to this.
This would actually make so much more sense than it is right now! I know all phone-brands want to add there personal touch to there android phones like SE did with timescape and mediascape etc, but its all just based on the same firmware right ? So why cant these things like timescape and mediascape be seen like an update ? rather than fully integrated in the firmware ?
In my opinion, phone brands should go back to what they are actually good at.. manufacturing phones, and google should go back to what they are good at, designing new android versions, this shouldn't be the other way around.
Could one of you pls explain this to me ?
As a master student in economics, IF android could actually be compared like windows as I just explained, this would only have positive effects on the android/phone market, instead of all these angry and disappointed customers...
http://gizmodo.com/5733556/the-complete-state-of-android-froyo-upgrades
this threat is what made me write this, it is clear we are not the only ones stuck with 2.1 (but the gods at XDA are doing their best to fix this!)
I understand your point. My take on it is about the fragmentation. I'm not commenting whether it is good or not, but here's what I think. Windows machine have a much higher memory where they can store drivers, settings, etc. Just Windows XP alone took approx 6GB? I don't think phones can have that much internal memory at the moment. Also, PC's have interfaces where everything comes out to the correct machine language (PCI, SATA, etc) While these lacks on phones. They have different architectures and peripherals that supports only that architecture. Therefore, to keep it lightweight, it is the manufacturer's responsibility that if they are using OS such as Android, that the OS works with their hardware, while on PC, it's more hardware to work with the OS.
I'm sure if there's a universal hardware interface for mobile devices and enough internal memory, your wish will come true
unknown13x said:
I understand your point. My take on it is about the fragmentation. I'm not commenting whether it is good or not, but here's what I think. Windows machine have a much higher memory where they can store drivers, settings, etc. Just Windows XP alone took approx 6GB? I don't think phones can have that much internal memory at the moment. Also, PC's have interfaces where everything comes out to the correct machine language (PCI, SATA, etc) While these lacks on phones. They have different architectures and peripherals that supports only that architecture. Therefore, to keep it lightweight, it is the manufacturer's responsibility that if they are using OS such as Android, that the OS works with their hardware, while on PC, it's more hardware to work with the OS.
I'm sure if there's a universal hardware interface for mobile devices and enough internal memory, your wish will come true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what you are saying, but then again, why dont we just manufacture android phones based on the same architecture ? So they will all be compatible with every version of android ?
If this could be accomplished in some way, manufacturers wont have to deal with the lack of compatibility of newer versions anymore, and every phone will run optimal with any given firmware.
Android is at the same development stage as windows when it was win.dos, effectively; the future development was not foreseen. The aggressive marketing by ms changed that, obviously, but pcs from that era are hopelessly outdated. Mobile manufacturers are keeping up with Google rather than being dictated to by them. Eventually, a physical threshold will result in Android updates being software instead of hardware.
I think...
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
android is a fairly new n young operating system... its hardly 2 yrs old....
give it time... the way its goin now it headed in the right direction (same as windows)... compatibility issues will be sorted as time progresses... bare in mind that android devices span vast array of price ranges (and thus diff hardware as suited for that price) so compatibility will be an issue which will be sorted out in time...
clintax said:
I understand what you are saying, but then again, why dont we just manufacture android phones based on the same architecture ? So they will all be compatible with every version of android ?
If this could be accomplished in some way, manufacturers wont have to deal with the lack of compatibility of newer versions anymore, and every phone will run optimal with any given firmware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is there's too many architecture to go for. A universal architecture means we're eliminating many companies. For example, say we choose snapdragon as our universal. That means ARM, NVIDIA, will all be taken out the competition. Of course ARM cannot build a microcontroller based on snapdragon's design either, this is due to licensing and such. I'm sure manufacturer wants something like you said, it will be much easier to manage, but chip makers are doing things their own way. Also, you have to consider how much new technology is being introduced to phones in just one year. It is massive. Even if phones have the same architecture, the problem that comes about is the memory size to store all the drivers. Either way, it will have to go through the manufacturer to strip it out, which would be back to where we start again. So it will not work out anytime soon...However I did heard Google is aiming to make a flexible Android where it can do something like you said, but looking at the hardware change, it's impossible for now
FWIW - I think that it's more to do with USP's - Each manufacturer could, quickly and fairly easily just bung stock android onto their hardware, and therefore make it extremely easy for us all to upgrade to the latest OS.. but they think.. "hang on, if we do that then all the phones will look and work in the same way.. why would anyone want to buy ours, over xxx competitors phone... no that simply won't do.. we must make our phones special, different and more appealing to XYXY subset of the market... that way we'll sell more phones than our competitors and eventually.. if we're lucky, we might just compete with Apple"..
Or something along those lines!
Gawd - I thought for a minute you actually wanted Android to be "like" Windows...
I nearly pooped myself.
k1sr said:
Gawd - I thought for a minute you actually wanted Android to be "like" Windows...
I nearly pooped myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking the same way! Windows? Nah! Windows itself is a bloatware OS...
Deleted...
Frankly, the number of different versions there's going to be of this phone is starting to worry me.
CPU/GPU: Samsung Exynos / Nvidia Tegra 2
Display: SAMOLED+ / SLCD
NFC: yes / no
Radio: GSM / whatever legacy system the US still insists on using
Carriers: regular international version / a gadzillion heavily branded and slightly but incompatibly modified vanity versions for the major US carriers
That's a lot of possible combinations, even if only a fraction actually come into existence. Probably each will require their own firmware variant as well, resulting in
customer confusion
slower and fewer official updates, with more bugs
fragmented ROM dev community, resulting in reduced ROM choice and maybe even quality
a lot more bricks due to flashing incompatible stuff
even incompatible apps, to viz Tegra optimised games
...
IMHO, this phone alone is worse for Android's dreaded 'fragmented' image than the core OS versions ever were.
Discuss.
(Yes, I like being provocative, no, this is not intended as a troll. Maybe even some good can come of it, like not splitting the XDA forums that much, this time.)
Well like most phones at minimum there will be 2 variants one for GSM other CMDA like the Korean version which includes NFC and also TV (lucky buggers!)
fallenguru said:
Frankly, the number of different versions there's going to be of this phone is starting to worry me.
CPU/GPU: Samsung Exynos / Nvidia Tegra 2
Display: SAMOLED+ / SLCD
NFC: yes / no
Radio: GSM / whatever legacy system the US still insists on using
Carriers: regular international version / a gadzillion heavily branded and slightly but incompatibly modified vanity versions for the major US carriers
That's a lot of possible combinations, even if only a fraction actually come into existence. Probably each will require their own firmware variant as well, resulting in
customer confusion
slower and fewer official updates, with more bugs
fragmented ROM dev community, resulting in reduced ROM choice and maybe even quality
a lot more bricks due to flashing incompatible stuff
even incompatible apps, to viz Tegra optimised games
...
IMHO, this phone alone is worse for Android's dreaded 'fragmented' image than the core OS versions ever were.
Discuss.
(Yes, I like being provocative, no, this is not intended as a troll. Maybe even some good can come of it, like not splitting the XDA forums that much, this time.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SLCD Never confirmed. Rumor only. Tegra-version in Hong Kong gets Super Amoled +.
Agreed! Its going to be very confusing, Hopefully Samsung says to the various carriers this time around that they are not going to release different versions of the phone, but i dont see that happening. More Options= More Phones sold= More money for Samsung.
EleCtrOx666 said:
SLCD Never confirmed. Rumor only.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but seeing as the SGS1 and the NS got an SLCD version, I find it to be credible, at least.
nikzDHD said:
version which includes NFC and also TV (lucky buggers!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm rather relieved that there's no DVB-H receiver or the like in the phone - wouldn't want to have to pay the TV tax.
fallenguru said:
Frankly, the number of different versions there's going to be of this phone is starting to worry me.
CPU/GPU: Samsung Exynos / Nvidia Tegra 2
Display: SAMOLED+ / SLCD
NFC: yes / no
Radio: GSM / whatever legacy system the US still insists on using
Carriers: regular international version / a gadzillion heavily branded and slightly but incompatibly modified vanity versions for the major US carriers
That's a lot of possible combinations, even if only a fraction actually come into existence. Probably each will require their own firmware variant as well, resulting in
customer confusion
slower and fewer official updates, with more bugs
fragmented ROM dev community, resulting in reduced ROM choice and maybe even quality
a lot more bricks due to flashing incompatible stuff
even incompatible apps, to viz Tegra optimised games
...
IMHO, this phone alone is worse for Android's dreaded 'fragmented' image than the core OS versions ever were.
Discuss.
(Yes, I like being provocative, no, this is not intended as a troll. Maybe even some good can come of it, like not splitting the XDA forums that much, this time.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree with you a lot...
1. The term "Android fragmentation" as it is used in the community has nothing at all to do about a single hardware manufacturer's different hw-configurations. Android fragmentation is about the problem for developers to make their apps compatible with different Android versions (API-levels) and different resolutions/display sizes. App compatibility is not affected by different base-band chips or different display types with same size and resolution.
2. Having different models for different markets has been common for many years, nothing new here. E g Korea has had TV as standard on high-end phones for years.
3. A modern smartphone platform is modular and similar to a PC (Android is Linux-based). There is probably no-one in the world who has exactly the same PC components in their PC as I have in my PC (e g exactly the same CPU, GPU, TV-card, sound card, mouse, memory etc), but stilll my PC works flawlessy. Removing a peripheral circuit as NFC in certain markets to save cost is a no-brainer for testing, integration, developing Custom ROM etc.
4. So far all rumours indicates that i9100 is with Super AMOLED+ and Exynos. So there will probably not be a Tegra 2 in i9100. Tegra 2 seems to be used in i9103 Otherwise it could be a bit confusing since Exynos & Tegra 2 are different SOC's with quite different GPU's.
5. All your stuff about different carriers etc is just strange, there is nothing new concerning Galaxy S2 here compared to other phones. Having different base-band chips in different market (I don't know if Galaxy S2 needs that) is not a problem and could even improve performance since it is easier to tune the antenna for fewer frequency bands.
6. I don't know if a versions with S-LCD will be called i9100 or not, I'd prefere not to have S-LCD with model name i9100, but we'll see what happens. HTC did this with Desire, and that is one of the most popular phones for modding at XDA. So nothing new here.
tjtj4444 said:
I disagree with you a lot...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you really think that app compatibility won't be affected in practice? The way I see it, if a developer wants to be able to say "compatible with / tested on Samsung Galaxy S 2" they'll have to a) know of and b) test on all variants, or at least the major ones. Take Skype as an example, which works from 2.1 on most phones but needs 2.2 on most / all versions of the SGS1. If you want to use the NDK it gets worse - every major game developer'll need a lengthy FAQ about which version of the game goes on which version of the SGS2.
A lot of apps needed fixes to work on low res devices like the original HTC Wildfire, etc.
On phones that are entirely different or at least perceived as such, this is less of a problem - devs can cope, but when technically near-identical phones are sold under different names (or quite different ones under the same name), there's bound to be a lot of consumer confusion atop of that.
Granted, maybe the other markets' models weren't as visible to me before Android. From a consumer perspective, the borders between markets are disappearing, though, thanks to the internet.
That would work, if there were, as for the PC, a common framework for the development of drivers, which are (also) distributed seperately from the hw. Sometimes drivers can be re-used on another phone with minimal modifications, but nowhere near all the time.
I agree with you insofar as I would love to be able to get just a phone, built to order (within limits), that I could install a variety of different Android distributions on. Sadly, that's not a reality yet.
Yes, we'll see.
Maybe it isn't new, but it's still absurd, at least from an European perspective. GSM vs. CDMA is one thing, but limiting specific models to certain frequency bands of the same standard is done purely for market seperation. It's even more stupid than the DVD region codes.
Again, we'll see.
I think having carrier specific versions with ultra minor changes is completely idiotic (looking at you America). It seems the networks there want to get you onto them because of the specific phone instead of having good plans/pricing.
I think the iPhone has it right, one model released worldwide, I wish every other company did that.
As an American, it irritates me, too, that there can't be one version that works in Europe, Asia, and US. Each unit might cost more to make, but it could save money by not having to mfr. 6 different phones instead of one.
I also wonder if Android will ever be truly compatible across multiple devices. Every pc is different, yet they can all run the same Windows or Linux versions, just with different drivers.
Scared27 said:
It seems the networks there want to get you onto them because of the specific phone instead of having good plans/pricing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good pricing/plans in not the philosophy of an american corporation, maximizing profits and keeping share holders happy at all costs is.
fallenguru said:
Do you really think that app compatibility won't be affected in practice? The way I see it, if a developer wants to be able to say "compatible with / tested on Samsung Galaxy S 2" they'll have to a) know of and b) test on all variants, or at least the major ones. Take Skype as an example, which works from 2.1 on most phones but needs 2.2 on most / all versions of the SGS1. If you want to use the NDK it gets worse - every major game developer'll need a lengthy FAQ about which version of the game goes on which version of the SGS2.
A lot of apps needed fixes to work on low res devices like the original HTC Wildfire, etc.
On phones that are entirely different or at least perceived as such, this is less of a problem - devs can cope, but when technically near-identical phones are sold under different names (or quite different ones under the same name), there's bound to be a lot of consumer confusion atop of that.
Granted, maybe the other markets' models weren't as visible to me before Android. From a consumer perspective, the borders between markets are disappearing, though, thanks to the internet.
That would work, if there were, as for the PC, a common framework for the development of drivers, which are (also) distributed seperately from the hw. Sometimes drivers can be re-used on another phone with minimal modifications, but nowhere near all the time.
I agree with you insofar as I would love to be able to get just a phone, built to order (within limits), that I could install a variety of different Android distributions on. Sadly, that's not a reality yet.
Yes, we'll see.
Maybe it isn't new, but it's still absurd, at least from an European perspective. GSM vs. CDMA is one thing, but limiting specific models to certain frequency bands of the same standard is done purely for market seperation. It's even more stupid than the DVD region codes.
Again, we'll see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think you're confusing optimization vs compatibility
ph00ny said:
i think you're confusing optimization vs compatibility
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, even though the distinction isn't as clear-cut as you might think. Tegra 2 optimised games won't run on other SoCs at all, Firefox Mobile (a freaking browser) will only run on ARMv7+. Even if a lot of apps without low res support somewhat work on low res phones, from the perspective of a customer they "don't work properly" - and that's it.
The fact that different phones support different features is not the problem, the lack of a simple and easy to understand way to communicate these feature differences to the consumer, is. We read spec sheets, regular people as a rule do not. But they'll still want to know why their friend with a German SGS2 can pay the parking fee by touching his phone to a thingamajig, while they, with the UK version, cannot. (Just an example, I've no idea who gets NFC and who doesn't.)
how to know
When you see a retail package, how would you know which version it is? do they show on the box?
hazem77 said:
When you see a retail package, how would you know which version it is? do they show on the box?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the model number would be printed somewhere in the area where the serial number / IMEI and barcodes are. What features that version has and doesn't have you'd have to know yourself.
EleCtrOx666 said:
SLCD Never confirmed. Rumor only. Tegra-version in Hong Kong gets Super Amoled +.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, Sammy announced the HK version as Tegra2/SA+, and then soon after corrected that, stating that HK would be Exynos/SA+
http://hktechnews.com/?p=327
Is it just me or does android Overall lack standardizations?
There are so many different versions of android tablets and phones that app developers seem to have to make for one, then keep changing for others.
Things do not seem to be cross compatible between devices either.
The way I'm looking at is is like windows:
With windows you have all kinds of PC's and there is a standard, Keyboard & mouse. Windows interfaces between the hardware and apps and allows seamless transfer between different PC's with windows OS.
Then I look at android. And what runs on my android tablet, wont work on my friends tablet. Same in reverse.
Basically has anyone else noticed this? Lack of standardization when it comes to a practical interface?
And it seems to fall on the app devs to support a specific device, when android itself should be the interface between the hardware and the app.
Does anyone see where I'm coming from?
What does everyone else think?
Do you think there will eventually be a standard with android devices like what happen to the PC after Microsoft made windows and created a standard in that respect?
Do you think that traditional PC computers running windows and MAC will eventually phase out?
--------------------------------------------
And whats the deal with a phone needing 2 GHz dual core CPU's?
If the code was optimized properly, wouldn't you be able to get the same speed and quality from half that?
I've seen high end android tablet lag badly, when an intel PC of lesser speed runs windows just fine.
I dont get it, It would save battery power as well if it was refined, would it not?
---------------------------------------------
I dont really want this to be a question air post and people answer, I'm hoping all kinds of us people can have one big giant discussion.
Maybe if enough people want a standard for tablets and smartphones like there is with computers, there will be better progress.
Because at the moment, everyone seems to be doing their own thing, and they are all suing each other over the dumbest details, so what if someone elses device has a home button in the front like an iPhone, where else would you put it?
I think Samsung has the best setup of all of them, its touch buttons in the front bottom, other buttons on the sides.
Seems like a good place to start a standard design, don't you think?
The biggest advantage that Android currently has is that its available for every price range, in every flavor you would want. Android reached 72% market share not due to the flagships but due to the lower end devices that majority of consumers buy. Standardizing the specs at a high end would cause it to not be affordable for many people especially in countries outside the US where there are no carrier subsidies. So I vote for it to go on like this.
premsrj said:
The biggest advantage that Android currently has is that its available for every price range, in every flavor you would want. Android reached 72% market share not due to the flagships but due to the lower end devices that majority of consumers buy. Standardizing the specs at a high end would cause it to not be affordable for many people especially in countries outside the US where there are no carrier subsidies. So I vote for it to go on like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean creating a standard like with windows PC's, they are all the same basically, and each has its own price range and level of power.
And windows is the interface between the hardware and the software you install.
With android, I don't see this, I see app developers having to make the app for each device, when they should just have to make it for the android OS, and the android OS is the interface and inturpurtation between the app you install and the device hardware.
Aside from that, they should all at least have a basic standard interface like home, back, search, power, volume, buttons and then the touch screen. Kinda like the samsung phone design.
There are only so many physically achievable ways we can design a smart phone, for example apple sued Samsung over copying their iPhone because the home button on the Samsung phone was mechanical. I mean, what is this world coming to? Where would apple have liked samsung to stick the home button? On the back of the device?
It is in a practical location. So why not put it front and bottom of the screen?
I'm after a "basic" standard, not a complete identical standard. Something kinda like how every windows PC has the same basic keyboard design and mouse design. The rest can be different... But apply it to smart phones and tablets in their own respective interfaces designed.
See what I mean?
(I'm thinking of this great world where android ARM tablets, PC's, and phones replace the current computer systems and stuff. It would work, android seems to be able to do so much more and consume so much less power. While maintaining the same or greater speeds.)
zBusterCB87 said:
I mean creating a standard like with windows PC's, they are all the same basically, and each has its own price range and level of power.
And windows is the interface between the hardware and the software you install.
With android, I don't see this, I see app developers having to make the app for each device, when they should just have to make it for the android OS, and the android OS is the interface and inturpurtation between the app you install and the device hardware.
Aside from that, they should all at least have a basic standard interface like home, back, search, power, volume, buttons and then the touch screen. Kinda like the samsung phone design.
There are only so many physically achievable ways we can design a smart phone, for example apple sued Samsung over copying their iPhone because the home button on the Samsung phone was mechanical. I mean, what is this world coming to? Where would apple have liked samsung to stick the home button? On the back of the device?
It is in a practical location. So why not put it front and bottom of the screen?
I'm after a "basic" standard, not a complete identical standard. Something kinda like how every windows PC has the same basic keyboard design and mouse design. The rest can be different... But apply it to smart phones and tablets in their own respective interfaces designed.
See what I mean?
(I'm thinking of this great world where android ARM tablets, PC's, and phones replace the current computer systems and stuff. It would work, android seems to be able to do so much more and consume so much less power. While maintaining the same or greater speeds.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You must be a great essay writer
My English teacher would give you an A for sure.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda premium
I bought a Nextway Fast 9 X from spemall.com as shown here:
http://www.spemall.com/Nextway-F9X-...PS-Screen-2G-Ram-1-5GHz-4K-Video-Black_g.html
After fully charging the tablet I started using it and it froze. I then restarted it and its froze a total of 5 times. Its had errors with the launcher, when opening the apps tab all the images would look like the background but pixelated.
Here is a link to the pictures i took: http://s1232.beta.photobucket.com/user/xstingstreetx/library/Defective
Next, I was able to disable some things for the tablet to run properly without crashing. However, this thing score terrible on benchmarks and is VERY slow moving. The processor is actually 1.08Ghz not 1.5.
I was able to root it thanks to Bin4ry see here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1886460
Video by Bin4ry see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7EpkrCq1gfM
I was able to overclock on the stock kernel and such to 1.152 stable.
I was hoping someone could help to develop ROMs, Kernels, etc to make this thing work better.
Any and all ideas or feedback is appreciated.
Things that I didnt notice when I bought it is: I dont believe there is bluetooth or GPS
Also the GPS and blutooth either does not exist or possibly the software in the tablet just doesn't work with it.
xstingstreetx said:
Also the GPS and blutooth either does not exist or possibly the software in the tablet just doesn't work with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so you bought a non-brand cheap chinese tablet and now you want someone to develop a ROM for it ?
edit: wait. that is not that cheap. why on earth would you buy a non-brand tablet with a budget at 200$?
krankdroid said:
so you bought a non-brand cheap chinese tablet and now you want someone to develop a ROM for it ?
edit: wait. that is not that cheap. why on earth would you buy a non-brand tablet with a budget at 200$?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well no other tablet has competitive specs that I found. However I didnt know this tablet wasn't a 1.5 Ghz quad core as listed on the sellers site.
xstingstreetx said:
Well no other tablet has competitive specs that I found. However I didnt know this tablet wasn't a 1.5 Ghz quad core as listed on the sellers site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if something sounds to good to be true. it probaly is..
sad to say the chances of someone making a ROM for non-brand products is pretty slim, since most ROM are created on the basis that a device is widely bought and used. Of non-brand phone and tablets there are such a variety that developing for them makes no sense.
Get your money back if you can, and get a branded device. For 200$ you can get a Nexus 7.
if you want the same size and format of the one you got, look around for what samsung, acer, asus, hell even what Point Of View have to offer..
Sorry, but you won't like it -
The main disadvantage of buying a no-brand device is although it may work better the known brands, in case of a fault (software or hardware), you're on your own.... Not many users have flashed/fixed/used this device. So if you brick it, get a bootloop or find a bug, not many can help you.
Not speaking about the variety of ROMs...
I've been there.... I've bought a no-brand phone and after a year it's main PCB failed. I couldn't find a replacement part and had to throw the device away.
Anyway.....
Use the device, enjoy and don't brick it
Sent from my digital submersible hovercraft.
xstingstreetx said:
Well no other tablet has competitive specs that I found. However I didnt know this tablet wasn't a 1.5 Ghz quad core as listed on the sellers site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the moderators will give me permission, I can give you a link to where there are 4 custom ROMs for this tablet. I have installed the BETA4 and it better utilizes the Retina Display (unless you have bad eyes, and there is one geared for that one as the defective one you are using does). I honestly don't know if your problem can be helped with software, but it might... I can also give you a link to the newest stock ROM and a Windows app to install it. I would rather get permission first to post 2 direct links... one is to Arctablet (and you can do a Google or DuckDuckGo search and find it by the way) and the other one is to a tablet distributor who was good enough to create download links and instructions on how to use the hokey Chinese installer. The question is though, is your problem hardware or a botched ROM?
It does not have Bluetooth or GPS. My Archos outdoes it in that way, but it is a true quad-core retina display and mine works very nicely... nicer now that I have the better use of the resolution available. Its wildly vivid. I honestly can find no real issues other than a few I had from not wiping the thing before I flashed it (oddly it suggested I not do so... which caused me grief w/Google Play eventually). It comes rooted, and if you have one of those that are like partly-rooted or whatever some call it, do a factory reset and it will come back fully rooted. The ROMs of course are all rooted. I have a cheap 10.2", which honestly if I had not had something else would have given me ulcers, but hey... I only paid $14 for it from Quibids (including bid prices), so I can't complain. This one cost me around $150 with a few extras, so a little grief I can handle. But so far... those are interesting words... so far, it is actually very impressive. My daughter has a boyfriend who is an Apple fanatic, and he's kind of fixated on it from certain similarities to what he is coveting these days.
I have it going at 1.2ghz (quad-core), although I have gotten it up to just under the 1.5ghz it claims (1440). It will do it, but I wouldn't bet on its stability. It comes at 1.0 preset from manufacturer, but is easily changed with the cpu app of your choice. I use Setcpu... works for me. It has 2gb ram... can't complain.
I read some arguments on the cameras, but I don't see it... I took some pics tonight of my daughter on her way to a costume party... they are the best thing I have this side of my Kodak. I'm sure it takes better video than the Kodak though. Anyway... its responsive, sharp, and does what I want. You have to buy a Bluetooth dongle for next to nothing to have Bluetooth though for some bizarre reason it shows its there. The one page that I mentioned gives advice along with pics on how to do some interesting mods to it. It is capable of more than they shipped it with. I am sorry that you are having troubles with yours... I don't know if you still have yours or not. I've only had this a few weeks. If you are interested, let me know... and if the moderators allow it, I will post links.
I hate that you have had such grief with yours. If I can help, I am willing.