OK, so I've had Android since the G1, then the Vibrant and now the SGS2 so I'm familiar with flashing and rooting and all that good stuff but some of the basics elude me...
I'm not a coder, programmer or modder in any way, shape or form. Nor do I claim to be.
Here's my question. Google writes the source code for the Android OS, then releases it to manufacturers to add their bloat/spin (TouchWiz, Sense, etc). If the underlying code is the same, why is it not easier to take the original source code and flash it on any phone?
I'll use Windows as an example here:
If I buy a PC with Windows Home Premium on it from HP, I'll get all of the extra bloat that HP puts on the machine to "enhance" my experience. However, if I decide to, I can format (or flash) my PC and install a "clean" version of Windows (direct from Microsoft) on it direct from CD or DVD. Doesn't matter if I format and install on an HP, Dell, Gateway, Acer, etc. because the source code is same. Aside from a couple of driver issues, on first boot, everything works.
Why is it not the same for Android on the phones? Is getting the code for the drivers what holds us back?
The other bonus is that even if something goes wrong, since I essentially rooted my PC (I removed what was originally installed on the PC and put the original source code on it) I can still send it in to get repaired to HP or Gateway or Dell. I can't do that with a phone. If I root my phone, my warranty is void. Even if the hardware is defective.
Windows has a "minimum hardware requirements" that a PC must meet in order to run Windows.
Why would Google not have a similar requirement? "A phone must have these specs to run Android."
I understand that Sense, TouchWiz, etc will add bloat to the interface but (and maybe I'm naive here) it shouldn't be that hard to get back to the source code on the phones, should it?
Help me. I don't understand. Again, I'm not a coder, programmer or modder in any way, shape or form. I root my phone(s) and try to get as close to the original source code as I can but I rely on smarter people to get me there. Granted I could buy a Nexus device and not have to worry about it. However, that just goes to further emphasis my question; Google pushes original source code out to the Galaxy Nexus, Nexus One, Nexus S. So why is it not easier to get that same source code on other phones?
Thanks in advance...
-Steve
The reason you void your warranty with rooting is simply because that's what you agree to when you purchase it. Just something that carriers/manufacturers have gone with and we as consumers haven't fought it. Realistically it might be something that could be addressed in court or through the FCC. If you buy a car and modify it, if something fails unless the dealership can prove that your modification caused the failure they still have to cover the repair under warranty. That said, for now the majority accept it and the majority still do not root and such so it's accepted. Perhaps as more people become aware of what can be done with their phones, especially if companies start using apps like Tasker to increase efficiency of their corporate devices, there's the possibility that this will change.
Buying an Android device, the warranty covers the system installation. Buying a PC, it does not.
The reason you void your warranty with rooting is simply because that's what you agree to when you purchase it. Just something that carriers/manufacturers have gone with and we as consumers haven't fought it. Realistically it might be something that could be addressed in court or through the FCC. If you buy a car and modify it, if something fails unless the dealership can prove that your modification caused the failure they still have to cover the repair under warranty. That said, for now the majority accept it and the majority still do not root and such so it's accepted. Perhaps as more people become aware of what can be done with their phones, especially if companies start using apps like Tasker to increase efficiency of their corporate devices, there's the possibility that this will change.
kuisma said:
Buying an Android device, the warranty covers the system installation. Buying a PC, it does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the feedback and I get the analogies, however, my original question remains unanswered:
Why is it so difficult to get the original source code onto any android device? Is it drivers? Manufacturer incompatibility?
I'd be interested to learn the process (just a general overview and hopefully in English) it takes to port the original source code onto multiple devices.
Thanks again...
-Steve
brisseau said:
Why is it so difficult to get the original source code onto any android device? Is it drivers? Manufacturer incompatibility?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hardware manufacturers develops specific hardware suitable for their devices, requiring special drivers and/or kernel modifications.
The radio code is not a part of the Android OS, and only the Radio Interface Layer (RIL) must conform to the Android API specs.
Hardware manufacturers are free to vary installation parameters such as what disk types to use (mmc, mtd), sizing of partitions to best utilise the available space, etc.
Just want to share this to all Sony Android phone owners...
...this would definitely answer all questions about warranty and unlocking bootloaders...
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sony-refuses-to-repair-phones-with-unlocked-bootloaders_id32812
If you are a Sony user and plan to unlock the bootloader of your handset using the official Sony tool, you may want to read this article before you proceed. Apparently, Sony Mobile is refusing to repair hardware problems of users' handsets with unlocked bootloaders.
The XperiaBlog reports that a number of users who have tried to take advantage of the Sony repair centers have been turned down by the company, because of the "illegal unlock" of their phones' bootloaders. The bad thing here is that Sony wouldn't even repair factory defects like the yellow tint found in the screen of the Xperia S. How convenient! This move is extremely surprising, considering the fact that Sony itself is providing the bootloader unlocking tool.
Truth be told, the manufacturer does warn its customers on its website that their warranty may be voided if they use the tool:
"Please note that you may void the warranty of your phone and/or any warranty from your operator if you unlock the boot loader."
However, if it "may" void the warranty, that means that in some situations it wouldn't void it. Unfortunately, Sony hasn't bothered to provide more details in order to make this whole thing somewhat more transparent for its users. Well, it looks like in 2012, some companies are still sticking to making vague statements, in an attempt to avoid responsibility and save a few bucks along the way. So, don't be fooled by the fact that the bootloader unlock tool is officially offered by the manufacturer - apparently using it is not "legal".
We've reached out to Sony for more info, and will update the post should we get a reply.
And here is a response from Sony...
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sony-explains-why-using-its-official-bootloader-unlock-tool-voids-your-warranty_id32972
You probably remember a story from a few days ago in which we told you how a number of customers ended up surprised that their warranty is voided due to them using the official bootloader unlock tool by Sony. We then reached out to the company in an attempt to get more information regarding the way Sony treats those devices, which have had their bootloadrs unlocked. Basically, we wanted to understand why a user's warranty is voided when they have used a manufacturer-provided tool. Our desire for more details was also intensified due to the somewhat vague statement found on Sony's site, which reads: "Please note that you may void the warranty of your phone and/or any warranty from your operator if you unlock the boot loader."
We now got a reply, and we have to say that we really appreciate the friendly and helpful attitude of the company regarding this issue. Here's what Sony Mobile's PR Manager had to say:
For most issues/problems, unlocking the bootloader voids the warranty. Sony Mobile only honors the warranty if it is a known issue in that model/batch of phones or if it is an issue that clearly could not have been caused by flashing a different ROM. Because a new ROM can have a wide range of consequences (e.g., it can overheat the battery or change the voltage, which can damage other components), that basically means that only a small subset of issues are still covered by the warranty. Therefore, even when the phone is in warranty, the service center usually has to do a very costly board swap in order to get the phone back to its original state before it can perform any repair. The end-user has to pay for that part of the repair.
We are proud of providing the unlock feature to the developer community. Previously, there was a large risk of bricking the phone when unlocking with third party software. Sony Mobile’s solution remove’s that risk. When we initially provided the unlock feature, it was presumed that only highly skilled developers and super-users would take advantage of it. From blogs and discussion boards, it was clear that the community understood the risks and that unlocking largely voided the warranty. It appears that less sophisticated users (despite all our warnings) might be using the feature, and are now surprised by the consequences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By the looks of it, Sony is more concerned with users flashing a custom ROM, rather than simply unlocking the bootloader. Still, the official also says that known issues (like the yellowish tint on the screen of the Xperia S), are OK and should be covered by your warranty, even if you've used the tool, yet, some customers complained that their warranty wasn't honored. We guess that it will simply depend on the repair center that you visit, or even the person that will examine your phone. At least, one thing is now certain - if you have unlocked your bootloader, you still have chances of getting repair service, but don't count too much on it.
I'm pretty sure most of the folks here already knew that, and objectively speaking Sony has the right to do so. You can easily damage/destroy the phone with custom rom/kernel (OC for example), and you cant expect Sony to undo your mistakes.
So I found myself looking around at different smartphone related articles like I always do when I stumbled across one in particular that had me scared! The article was talking about Samsung and Google bringing Knox to android L. We all know how much of a problem Knox has been to us here at the dev community.
Anyways have a look for yourself here
skeezer308 said:
So I found myself looking around at different smartphone related articles like I always do when I stumbled across one in particular that had me scared! The article was talking about Samsung and Google bringing Knox to android L. We all know how much of a problem Knox has been to us here at the dev community.
Anyways have a look for yourself here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hate to break it to you, but knox or no knox it will likely be a step up in security.
Why wouldn't it be?
Call it what ever you want, just make sure you start shopping for a dev edition.
Yes this was reported when they released the L preview because it's the first time they've included Samsung code into AOSP.
Every release of android will be a step up in security, I'm just going to move on from Verizon if it gets to the point where no boot loader can be unlocked.
joshm.1219 said:
Yes this was reported when they released the L preview because it's the first time they've included Samsung code into AOSP.
Every release of android will be a step up in security, I'm just going to move on from Verizon if it gets to the point where no boot loader can be unlocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The bottom line is that flexibility and customization will always interfere with security and both, fortunately and unfortunately, the latter is one that is of major concern to corporations.
Some of the arguments and measures are over the top but for the most part it part of technology maturing. Rooting a phone for most people here is harmless and enables a purpose, but it also opens the door to circumvent security and encrypted materials from our devices.
It seems Samsung and Verizon are open to creating a "developer" version to allow for justified valid reasons to root and customize, but the more personal and business purposes merge the more security becomes more important over flexibility.
I am not saying this makes it good or that you should like it. But it something that inevitably will continue to progress making it more difficult for complete control of your device.
Capitalism is based on profitability and adoption and if you get large corporation to endorse you methods then you have a huge revenue channel, right, wrong or indifferent.
Hopefully an innovation will come along that will enable the right balance, but only time will tell.
Personally I have recently decided to join BYOD at my work and consequently had to unroot my device, and I have to admit that I miss some aspects, but not enough to give up the convenience of having all I need in ONE device.
Just my $0.02
Well the part that had me concerned was knowing how locked down Samsung devices have become, especially on Verizon and ATT networks. I may be wrong but I think part of the reason we still haven't been able to find an exploit to unlock the bootloader is because of the tightening grips of Knox. Now don't get me wrong I understand that there is a need for security, especially in business with BYOD. I was half scared they were attempting to lock down android to that extent as a whole. As I read further into the article I had learned that some of the Knox feature I was fearing wear hard ware implemented. I think this part from the article pretty much sums it up.
"Even though Samsung is sharing many of the Knox functions with Google on Android L, they will still offer a superior security solution on Samsung devices. This is due to several features requiring deep hardware integration that can only be managed directly by Samsung. As listed on the Samsung Knox blog, the following will remain specific to Samsung:
TrustZone-based Integrity Measurement Architecture (TIMA)
Real-time Kernel Protection
Client Certificate Management (CCM)
Trusted Boot-based Key store
Remote attestation
Trusted Boot
Biometric authentication
KNOX Smart Card Support"
skeezer308 said:
Well the part that had me concerned was knowing how locked down Samsung devices have become, especially on Verizon and ATT networks. I may be wrong but I think part of the reason we still haven't been able to find an exploit to unlock the bootloader is because of the tightening grips of Knox. Now don't get me wrong I understand that there is a need for security, especially in business with BYOD. I was half scared they were attempting to lock down android to that extent as a whole. As I read further into the article I had learned that some of the Knox feature I was fearing wear hard ware implemented. I think this part from the article pretty much sums it up.
"Even though Samsung is sharing many of the Knox functions with Google on Android L, they will still offer a superior security solution on Samsung devices. This is due to several features requiring deep hardware integration that can only be managed directly by Samsung. As listed on the Samsung Knox blog, the following will remain specific to Samsung:
TrustZone-based Integrity Measurement Architecture (TIMA)
Real-time Kernel Protection
Client Certificate Management (CCM)
Trusted Boot-based Key store
Remote attestation
Trusted Boot
Biometric authentication
KNOX Smart Card Support"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a BIG difference between locked bootloaders and Knox...the bootloader is a proprietary part of the firmware, not the OS...Knox is integrated in the OS....neither have anything to do with the other. Please venture into the T-Mobile, Sprint and International S4 forums to see the effects of Knox. If you do not want a locked bootloader switch to a carrier that does not do it or phones that do not have it. I understand Verizon has even blocked the use of HTCDev on their newer HTC devices and updates. These carriers locking the bootloaders do so to have the most secure phones and be able to go after the military and commercial contracts. So again, do not think Knox has anything to do with the lock down of AT&T and Verizon....that is all between the carrier and Samsung.
m3Jorge said:
The bottom line is that flexibility and customization will always interfere with security and both, fortunately and unfortunately, the latter is one that is of major concern to corporations.
Some of the arguments and measures are over the top but for the most part it part of technology maturing. Rooting a phone for most people here is harmless and enables a purpose, but it also opens the door to circumvent security and encrypted materials from our devices.
It seems Samsung and Verizon are open to creating a "developer" version to allow for justified valid reasons to root and customize, but the more personal and business purposes merge the more security becomes more important over flexibility.
I am not saying this makes it good or that you should like it. But it something that inevitably will continue to progress making it more difficult for complete control of your device.
Capitalism is based on profitability and adoption and if you get large corporation to endorse you methods then you have a huge revenue channel, right, wrong or indifferent.
Hopefully an innovation will come along that will enable the right balance, but only time will tell.
Personally I have recently decided to join BYOD at my work and consequently had to unroot my device, and I have to admit that I miss some aspects, but not enough to give up the convenience of having all I need in ONE device.
Just my $0.02
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know, I don't understand how it would affect anything if they let a user decide if they wanted their bootloader unlocked for every device.
joshm.1219 said:
I don't know, I don't understand how it would affect anything if they let a user decide if they wanted their bootloader unlocked for every device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the users are not always the owners. My work phone is an Apple 5s. But "My" is not really accurate. It's my employer's phone that they give to me to use for work purposes. So I'm the user, but if the owner wants it locked down, that's their prerogative.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
brizey said:
Because the users are not always the owners. My work phone is an Apple 5s. But "My" is not really accurate. It's my employer's phone that they give to me to use for work purposes. So I'm the user, but if the owner wants it locked down, that's their prerogative.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So require owner account access then
I personally think if they did include knox in android L there would still be an option to use fastboot to unlock the device.
xXsquirr3lsXx said:
I personally think if they did include knox in android L there would still be an option to use fastboot to unlock the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This would be correct. Please see OP linked articled to see what is is actually being implemented here.
My rant about At&t and I why I am angry with them about my predicament with my s7.
PLEASE READ DISCLAIMER AT THE BOTTOM AND ALL ASTRICKED ITEMS. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
I will say how disappointed in at&t I am; it should be illegal to lock phones like this. The last samsung galaxy able to be rooted was the s4 and note 2 (don't quote me on that is was guestimation). But like all the idiots caught up in the buzz of owning the newest device, I got burned by the note 4. Fool me once shame on you, but fool me twice shame on me. I got burned again on the s7, and developers on here have basically given up rooting anything else (since the note 4 crisis there's a large bounty for whomever get the first permaroot) . Maybe if millions of us write to samsung about how at&t is ruining their products, they could do something about this travesty. <b>
Well if could some root required apps to work on my phone I would be much happier. I can't even use the current version of lucky patcher, how stupid is that. <b>
If your phone isn't rooted or have never felt the joy of a rooted phone (it is like endless possibilities all in the palm of your hand), and if you don't know what rooting is, get a clue, (Google it). Beg, barrow, steal one from a guy the next County over, forge one, trade for one, find one, save up for 3 months to buy one on eBay, I don't care how you get a clue, but you need one. The ability to Root our phone should be a fundamental right. (particularly with what went on with Apple and the FBI in California) We buy the phone, pay for it's service, then you treat us like we somehow don't know something has changed. (All the sudden "security updates that happen right after finding root for other devices and then people update their devices and it is gone back to square one.) Who is going to be responsible for all the millions of phones that are going to be trash because of this?
(because now on certain devices it softbricks the phone, sure it roots it, but what good is a rooted phone when you can't use it? (I relate it to something close to ransomware, on a computer, where software hold it (the computer) hostage until you meet the criminal's demands (usually money), so that you can get your computer back, and then sometimes they just leave it in place. (nasty crap fun to get rid of without reinstalling the OS) In this case it holds your phone hostage until you meet at&t's demands of "removing non at&t software", and until such time that the software is removed it remains bricked. If you have this issue, which I have only seen it mentioned a handful of time, and happen to have a Samsung device (with or without warranty) they will fix for free and even pay shipping both ways (now that's how you keep customers happy) I still have this issue as I have not sent my phone in yet and if someone knows how to fix it I would like to know. It goes from the ransom page with the padlock unlocked and warnings from at&t, then it goes to a second page saying that I have a Reactivation Lock in place. I have tried everything stated on the forum about RL, but my case is unique because of my stupid idea of seeing if king root had figured out how to root note 4 at&t sm-N910A version. To answer your question did it work, yes and no. Read the bricking bit above.)
Surely not your loyal customers, surely not the one who actually make and put their name on the phone, no I blame the cell phone companies. They have gotten to big for their own shoes on this one, they stepped in a giant pile of it. How many millions of customers have you lost at&t? Hmmm? Answer that one. Maybe I'll be the next to jump ship, sprint has a great plan, half the price, and they'll pay our way out of the eta( early termination fee(s) ln case you didn't know) up to 600 USD on each line. Sounds good to where do I sign, oh you need to take my piece of it phone and trade it for one the COMES with an unlocked bootloader. Take it I never wanted this piece of it to begin with. Bye At&t, you had a good ride with most of us for longer than a decade, but you done shot yourself in the foot on this one. You should have never changed your name and started in the cell phone business. South Western Bell is dead, and this monstrosity that has been created is nothing more than a shell of its former company, what a bunch of sell outs. I hope you sleep good at night knowing how many people are cursing your name from every roof top and highest building. You don't play with other people's it. It isn't proper nor is it called for. Some customers will be loyal to the end, but I am sick of all the red tape and garbage we have to put up with. Higher rates for the same service? Do you think we are stupid?
DISCLAIMER
*PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS MY OWN OPINIONS. IT IS AIMED AT AT&T, AND THEIR INABILITY TO LEAVE A GOOD THING ALONE. IT IS NOT MEANT TO OFFEND US NORMAL FOLK THAT PAY RIDICULOUS PHONE BILLS EVERY MONTH. IF YOU ARE ONE OF THESE PEOPLE AND YOU FIND THIS OFFENSIVE I AM SORRY. I NEVER CUSSED OR SAID ANYTHING OFFENSIVE ABOUT OR TO AN INDIVIDUAL. *
*ANY INSTANCES OF "IT" THAT ARE EXTRAGRAMMATIC ARE A CUSS WORD IN DISGUISE AND IS SELF EXPLANATORY*
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT WITH YOUR OWN OPINIONS THIS A JUDGEMENT FREE ZONE, SO PUT SOME FEELING IN IT. OCCASIONAL SWEARING IS TO BE EXPECTED (AS LONG AS IT IS OK WITHIN THE POLICIES OF XDA IF DOUBT DON'T DO IT.).
ANY HELP WITH ABOVE STATED ISSUE PLEASE LINK BELOW SO THE POST ENDS UP IN THE PROPER SECTION (TROUBLESHOOTING AND WHATNOT).
ANYTHING FOUND IN PARENTHESES WAS ADDED FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, AND NOT MEANT TO DEMEAN ANYONE. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW THE TERM OF KNOWLEDGY.
IF ANYTHING IN THIS RANT HAS BEEN MISREPRESENTED OR IS INCORRECT PLEASE BRING TO MY ATTENTION.
THANK YOU TO ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY READ ALL THIS.
God bless and peace out,
Kelentaria
I switched to AT&T because of direcTV unlimited (saves me 15 bucks a month from what I was paying). I don't really care much about having root access, but I do care about being able to erase the bloat on the phone. Bloat should be optional software, not burned into the OS. Look at Windows for a PC. If you don't want an app that came preloaded, you simply uninstall it. How is that even legal to have software stuck on your phone, which you have no idea what it is doing in the background and also claim you have 32gigs of storage, but you actually only have 19?
I see some of your points, but the whole rooting thing will be an uphill battle. Each company is required by law to patch exploits that allow the system to be compromised. Unless Google makes root access standard (meaning easily unlocked with an app etc) you won't see it again , and if you do, rarely.
I could forgive them for the root issue, but not for the bloat, lack of WiFi calling on android devices, etc.
Your points and opinion is well taken here as a fellow ATT user. We won't even get Samsung to move on rooting and bootloader unlocking since they're path is the business level users. That's mostly to do with all of us modder folks being in the small minority when it comes to purchasing their phones. There should be an option to unlock the bootloader from them directly. Basically them allowing us to either choose to void our warranty to unlock the bootloader which relieves them of the responsibility of folks blaming them for their choice of modding the phone. Similar to the HTC process. But again this is my opinion. ATT on the other hand has been a constant pain with not being consumer friendly for the last 4 years from my guestimation.
psufan5 said:
I switched to AT&T because of direcTV unlimited (saves me 15 bucks a month from what I was paying). I don't really care much about having root access, but I do care about being able to erase the bloat on the phone. Bloat should be optional software, not burned into the OS. Look at Windows for a PC. If you don't want an app that came preloaded, you simply uninstall it. How is that even legal to have software stuck on your phone, which you have no idea what it is doing in the background and also claim you have 32gigs of storage, but you actually only have 19?
I see some of your points, but the whole rooting thing will be an uphill battle. Each company is required by law to patch exploits that allow the system to be compromised. Unless Google makes root access standard (meaning easily unlocked with an app etc) you won't see it again , and if you do, rarely.
I could forgive them for the root issue, but not for the bloat, lack of WiFi calling on android devices, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suggest you try Package Disabler Pro, its a small price to pay but it works perfectly disabling bloat from Samsung devices. It is not root but at the very least it helps make touchwiz bearable.
---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------
I don't think there is a single ATT user that doesn't share your opinion but nowadays we all know what we are getting into with them. Only the Nexus line remains untouched but with the recent surge in mobile payment use the manufacturers are locking down phones harder than eve, one the plus side it helps maintain security and protect your hard earned money but sadly some sacrifices must be made. My only wish is that Samsung would finally see the light and at the very least give us the option of stock android in their devices, a tall order I know but one that would be met with enthusiasm.
glm0025 said:
I suggest you try Package Disabler Pro, its a small price to pay but it works perfectly disabling bloat from Samsung devices. It is not root but at the very least it helps make touchwiz bearable.
---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------
I don't think there is a single ATT user that doesn't share your opinion but nowadays we all know what we are getting into with them. Only the Nexus line remains untouched but with the recent surge in mobile payment use the manufacturers are locking down phones harder than eve, one the plus side it helps maintain security and protect your hard earned money but sadly some sacrifices must be made. My only wish is that Samsung would finally see the light and at the very least give us the option of stock android in their devices, a tall order I know but one that would be met with enthusiasm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive done that, but the bloat still takes up a huge chunk of space - the APKs are just disabled
there hasn't been a bootloader unlocked at&t galaxy since the S3. The S4 was bootloader locked, but anyone with AMDL firmware (the second OTA) could bypass the bootloader and load ROMs that way. Anyone that updated past that was stuck with bootstrapped ROMs. The S4 was never bootloader unlocked ever.
psufan5 said:
Ive done that, but the bloat still takes up a huge chunk of space - the APKs are just disabled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooted or not, you wouldn't get that space back. The pre-installed crud is installed on the system partition which is a separate space from where user apps (and all data) are stored. If you rooted and deleted those apps, the space would just go unused. (And really, those apps don't take up much space in storage.)
On the other hand, there are things in the AT&T preload that can't be disabled. Some might be daemons that load before (and outside the scope of) android, and others are embedded deep into the existing modules (such as systemUI.) For example, AT&T still uses a variation of carrier IQ software for analytics.
However, even if you had root, you couldn't easily get rid of those things without completely changing the firmware to something else. Once you did that, you'd also lose AT&T variant specific things such as AT&T's implementation of VoLTE, video calling, etc. (Just because other firmware might support features by the same name, it doesn't mean that they'll work on AT&T's network.)
My biggest complaint these days with AT&T variants is that AT&T blocks important system updates. Even VERIZON has become better about releasing firmware updates and upgrades for android phones when compared to AT&T. (Verizon used to hold the crown of being the absolute LAST carrier to update their phones... but no more. Now AT&T clearly owns it.)
Here's the funny thing: AT&T claims that they are locking down bootloaders and such in order to have a higher level of security for business customers. Yet, by taking MONTHS longer to release firmware updates, AT&T phones are often vulnerable to malicious exploits long after those exploits have been fixed by Samsung/HTC/etc.
garyd9 said:
Rooted or not, you wouldn't get that space back. The pre-installed crud is installed on the system partition which is a separate space from where user apps (and all data) are stored. If you rooted and deleted those apps, the space would just go unused. (And really, those apps don't take up much space in storage.)
On the other hand, there are things in the AT&T preload that can't be disabled. Some might be daemons that load before (and outside the scope of) android, and others are embedded deep into the existing modules (such as systemUI.) For example, AT&T still uses a variation of carrier IQ software for analytics.
However, even if you had root, you couldn't easily get rid of those things without completely changing the firmware to something else. Once you did that, you'd also lose AT&T variant specific things such as AT&T's implementation of VoLTE, video calling, etc. (Just because other firmware might support features by the same name, it doesn't mean that they'll work on AT&T's network.)
My biggest complaint these days with AT&T variants is that AT&T blocks important system updates. Even VERIZON has become better about releasing firmware updates and upgrades for android phones when compared to AT&T. (Verizon used to hold the crown of being the absolute LAST carrier to update their phones... but no more. Now AT&T clearly owns it.)
Here's the funny thing: AT&T claims that they are locking down bootloaders and such in order to have a higher level of security for business customers. Yet, by taking MONTHS longer to release firmware updates, AT&T phones are often vulnerable to malicious exploits long after those exploits have been fixed by Samsung/HTC/etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bootloader is locked down for one reason - stop tethering on unlimited plans.
Thats about it.
psufan5 said:
Bootloader is locked down for one reason - stop tethering on unlimited plans.
Thats about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are misinformed.
I completely agree that the situation sucks. I know that this will fall over into the Note 6, and that saddens me. That is why I set up camp on the Apple side of the fence. They are always hacking into ios somehow (no fragmentation i guess?), and the OS, while still not as open as Android has matured a little. I do miss Android, but Samsung was my home, and it isn't easy switching to another OEM when their hardware designs are so different (no physical home button).
I happen to work for Sprint (for the time being), and the prices are better, but our systems suck, and our business practices are kind of shady. Hopefully I don't get into any trouble for this, but customers deserve to know the whole story. Example: a gentleman came in to get a new sim card for his S4 Mini. Now with at&t, you just go get a sim card, and all you have to worry about is standard/micro/nano. With Sprint, however, each size sim card has a wide variety of skus (barcodes), and we use a tool to see which ones are compatible with the device in question. In this guy's case, Sprint had discontinued the only sim card that would work with his phone.
To put it plainly, we force ultimatums on our customers; buy another phone, or do without. I'm actually ashamed to work for this company.
What sickens me is that they disable perfectly fine features to replace them with their crapware. I like their network coverage, but I'm really doubtful if I would/should stay with At&t anymore. I personally don't care much about the bootloader, but the fact that they are doing this sort of thing without facing any sort of push-back, is what annoys me.
sireniankyle said:
I completely agree that the situation sucks. I know that this will fall over into the Note 6, and that saddens me. That is why I set up camp on the Apple side of the fence. They are always hacking into ios somehow (no fragmentation i guess?), and the OS, while still not as open as Android has matured a little. I do miss Android, but Samsung was my home, and it isn't easy switching to another OEM when their hardware designs are so different (no physical home button).
I happen to work for Sprint (for the time being), and the prices are better, but our systems suck, and our business practices are kind of shady. Hopefully I don't get into any trouble for this, but customers deserve to know the whole story. Example: a gentleman came in to get a new sim card for his S4 Mini. Now with at&t, you just go get a sim card, and all you have to worry about is standard/micro/nano. With Sprint, however, each size sim card has a wide variety of skus (barcodes), and we use a tool to see which ones are compatible with the device in question. In this guy's case, Sprint had discontinued the only sim card that would work with his phone.
To put it plainly, we force ultimatums on our customers; buy another phone, or do without. I'm actually ashamed to work for this company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get what you are saying 100% but the only problem for me is that a locked down Android device does more than a jailbreaked iPhone any day of the week.,at the end of the day Android is still more open than IOS. As of right now Marshmallow has proven good enough for me that I'm not missing root or custom roms, that I would root and unlock if I had the chance you better believe it but even 6.0 Touchwiz is bearable right now.
glm0025 said:
I get what you are saying 100% but the only problem for me is that a locked down Android device does more than a jailbreaked iPhone any day of the week.,at the end of the day Android is still more open than IOS. As of right now Marshmallow has proven good enough for me that I'm not missing root or custom roms, that I would root and unlock if I had the chance you better believe it but even 6.0 Touchwiz is bearable right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It heavily depends on how well you know Cydia. . You can change everything about the layout in an iphone through winterboard or dreamboard. You can customize power options, and assign on screen and button shortcuts no matter where you are on the device (app, home screen, locked). Ad blocker, free spotify premium, a youtube downloader built into youtube, custom carrier logos, system wide night mode, keyboard sub symbols, finger print locked apps, remove the media cap in imessage or text messages, enable zedge ringtone downloads, kill all background apps, pop out video for any app, and custom folder sizes.
I can agree that a few of those are just catching up with Android, but a system wide on or off wifi ad blocker is something that only root can do. There are some things, like the no media cap in messages, that even a rooted android device can't technically do (depends on the carrier I suppose), because they don't go through Apple servers.
This isn't me crapping on Android. I love Android. I just needed a place to hold up until Samsung gets it together. I refuse to buy their locked up garbage anymore. The htc 10 is looking pretty good, too, but I was hoping for something with amoled.
Just so everyone is clear, we dont discuss piracy or fraud or such on XDA.
App developers work hard for their money, trust me it is hard to earn a living at 99cents a pop. Lets support our developers instead of supporting theft.
You're dumb. You're *****ing about a $600 term fee which is impossible for a single line. Buy your phone international or unlocked if this is such an issue for you and stop whining. The ATT model of phones are NOT for power users. Plain and simple. I'm surprised so many people are taking the time to read you *****ing.
This post is so funny...
You are all over the place with your words, your thoughts and your anger.
Why would you purchase the S7 on AT&T if you already knew all of this?
Especially if this has already happened to you with your Note 4?
End of the day, most of the customers who use AT&T have no idea about root. They have no care or concern about these things.
People like us, on XDA, who love to root and customize our phones have to understand that there is a paradigm shift in Android (particularly in regards to Samsung devices) that focuses on security rather than customization. Especially when dealing with Carrier phones. The bloat, the locked bootloader, the restrictions all have their reasons for existing.
Especially when Samsung is amidst a global (albeit slow) roll out of Samsung Pay. Trying to align themselves ever so closely with Apple in terms of quality and brand recognition.
Samsung Pay will NEVER work on a rooted phone, EVER! Doesn't matter if you restore stock firmware etc...
Carriers also have their reasons as well...
There are plenty of reasons why they both do it, most of which I don't want to sit here and write out one by one. Like you said in your post... Google it.
End of the day, if you want to root or customize your device then you should do your research before dropping $700+ on a phone.
Plenty of bloat free, bootloader unlocked, international and non carrier phones available for you to achieve root and enjoy Android.
Coming on here and posting a wall of whine just makes you look silly and childish.
Yes, it sucks... I share your annoyance as I'm sure many other AT&T/XDA members do as well - for years now.
End of the day, these mega corporations don't care about you or what makes you happy. It's a business, their business, deal with it. We all have to... If you want to protest, protest with your wallet.
HNIC215 said:
Samsung Pay will NEVER work on a rooted phone, EVER! Doesn't matter if you restore stock firmware etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I tend to agree with the majority of your post, I think this one statement I quoted might be a bit too absolute.
My understanding of SPay is that it relies on the KNOX fuse to determine if a phone is modified. If true, then if an exploit is discovered and implemented which grants root without tripping KNOX, then SPay could possibly work on a rooted device. (Hiding root is doable, and supersu has been playing the cat/mouse game with Android Pay for several months on this...)
The galaxy S6 was rootable without tripping KNOX when it was initially released...
Of course, it's possible that there's something in the samsung firmware that will immediately trip KNOX if root is even detected. If so, it's something new that hasn't been there before. Previously, tripping KNOX required an action at the bootloader level - and usually occurred when an image not signed by samsung was flashed via ODIN.
Moving slightly off topic...
The problem, in my opinion, isn't that root can't be gained. There are plenty of exploits for gaining privileges that either Samsung takes too long to patch, or that the carriers (specifically AT&T) take too long to release the patches for. (AT&T is already 2 months behind on the S7's security patches. Those are patches for security concerns that are now publicly announced and should be easily exploited by reverse engineering the fixes that google publishes.)
The real problem is that people who would develop and publish a root method for hobbyists don't care anymore. Those people aren't going to buy a bootloader locked S7. Either they'll buy a different phone entirely (from a manufacturer that's more dev friendly), or they'll buy a non-carrier model that isn't bootloader locked. (Actually, there's another group, but it's very small: Industry insiders who are constrained by legal agreements (such as NDA's) preventing them from releasing anything they might come up with.)
garyd9 said:
While I tend to agree with the majority of your post, I think this one statement I quoted might be a bit too absolute.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what a Samsung Rep told me when I had the international Note 5 and wanted to know if I would be able to use Samsung Pay here in the states.
First, they said Samsung Pay would have to be available in the device's country of origin.
Second, they said the device can NEVER be rooted. If the device is rooted, it will NEVER be able to run Samsung Pay on it for the remainder of its life. Regardless if you restore with stock firmware and unroot.
Which makes sense actually when you think about it.
Apple is and has been synonymous with security and safety - in general but especially in regards to Apple Pay.
Samsung has always been considered the "Apple" or "iPhone" of the Android world - this statement holds true now more than ever before.
With Samsung Pay being released globally (slowly but surely)... Samsung will not risk the security of their platform by any means at all.
Letting users gain root access to their devices can potentially expose parts of their secure Samsung Pay platform and risk a major security or privacy incident that would lead to global fallout regardless of where the incident took place.
They will never allow this - especially with the progress they have made over the years to build a premium brand.
With the S7 and S7 Edge - they further that tradition and bring more security than ever.
Don't take my word for it...
Samsung Knox recognised as the strongest mobile security platform
Samsung has received strongest ratings for its mobile security platform Knox in areas including authentication methods, encryption management, jailbreak or root protection and application vetting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest version of Knox is currently available for Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge and optimised for Android 6.0 Marshmallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to a report, Mobile Device Security: A comparison of Platforms by renowned market analyst firm Gartner, Samsung's latest security platform Knox version 2.6 got the most strong ratings for any mobile security platform. The firm analysed the core OS security features built into a total of 12 mobile device platforms as well as enterprise management capabilities. Samsung also managed to gain leadership in mobile security market though Knox, coupled with Samsung Pay.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/samsung-knox-recognised-strongest-mobile-security-platform-1554836
HNIC215 said:
That's what a Samsung Rep told me when I had the international Note 5 and wanted to know if I would be able to use Samsung Pay here in the states.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay.. I wonder if he's related to one of the "samsung reps" that work in Best Buy stores.... or the ones that come visit AT&T stores on occasion. For the most part, they are really good in reciting the marketing material, but when it comes to details, they are clueless. In fact, at least as bad as Radio Shack sales people.
"KNOX" is a confusing term.
First, there's "KNOX" as a software security suite that is very closely related to what google calls "Android for Work." Both are basically a "secure" and private container/sandbox. The idea is that you take a personal smartphone to work and can run "work" apps that are completely sandboxes from personal apps. This has nothing whatsoever to do with SPay. SPay doesn't make use of this element of KNOX.
KNOX is also the name of a fuse in the device (which is likely a qualcomm "qfuse" in the SD820 S7's) that trips when the bootloader detects an unsigned kernel/recovery. _THIS_ is the KNOX that relates to SPay. Real human beings (not samsung sales or support reps) have confirmed that once the KNOX fuse is tripped, it prevents SPay from working. (It also prevents KNOX, the software suite mentioned above, from working.)
Now I need to express things in strange ways, and I hope you'll forgive the odd phrasing:
As far as devs on XDA and other sites similar to XDA have been able to determine, "root" does not prevent SPay from functioning. In fact, my understanding is that there are people who rooted their Galaxy S6 without tripping the KNOX fuse, later reverted to factory firmware, allowed the phone to OTA to newer firmware that included SPay, and SPay worked fine. However, there are others who have tripped the KNOX fuse while rooted who can no longer use SPay. The key here is that KNOX fuse...
I can say with a very large degree of confidence that SPay will work just fine if you happened to had a device that somehow had a working "su" binary in the path AND KNOX wasn't tripped. That might happen if the bootloader was designed to not trip KNOX... such as someone who developed software for preloads might have on a test device. Based only on information in the public domain, it might also happen if an exploit was found that didn't require flashing a custom kernel, recovery, etc.
It's POSSIBLE, and I actually don't know this, that the firmware released on these devices publicly has code to force tripping the KNOX fuse if root is detected. The galaxy S6 did NOT have this mechanism when towel root (or whatever root method it was) worked on it. I somehow doubt that samsung would have added this to the firmware, as there's too great a chance for a false positive, and tripping that KNOX flag is permanent.
In android user terms, a "rooted" device is merely a device that has a working suid "su" binary in the path owned by the 'root' user. (Later versions of android also require some sepolicy changes, but that's outside the scope of this thread.) That binary might be on /system or it might be in the kernel partition. However, neither is a permanent change to the device, and therefore it can be removed with no trace.
garyd9 said:
Okay.. I wonder if he's related to one of the "samsung reps" that work in Best Buy stores.... or the ones that come visit AT&T stores on occasion. For the most part, they are really good in reciting the marketing material, but when it comes to details, they are clueless. In fact, at least as bad as Radio Shack sales people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No this wasn't in person... Nor was it someone from the states (from what I could tell).
It was with a technician over the phone because the first customer service rep had no idea - so she transferred me to a technician.
Regardless, there is no point in discussing this endlessly.
There are already plenty of folks out there who are trying to solve this issue, only time will tell if they can succeed.
Let's see what happens.
I've noticed bricks are pretty common around here and it got me wondering: why is this even possible? It seems there are many solutions that Xiaomi could implement to prevent this situation entirely. Which makes me wonder: why haven't they?
I've not had a brick myself - but more so empathize with the situation.
I realize giving access to EDL mode for all end-users would probably create a vulnerability to the phone and that's why Xiaomi have probably locked it off - but they should have implemented a means to restore the phone from odd states. The answer is not to stop bootloader unlocks; that goes against Xiaomi's ethos.
The solution seems:
a) Redesign existing software to recognize a region-locked device in a mismatched state and securely provide a one-way stock flash and lock through use of server-side communication. Surely if a device is recognized sufficiently there must be a way of resuscitating it without blowing security wide open.
b) Redesign future hardware to include hard-coded and encrypted identifiers such as device serials on a separate read-only chip as to provide a verifiable, secure means of authorizing a flash reset and low-level flash back from any state. A simple jumper similar to the SIM eject but neatly hidden in the SIM slot would provide an accessible trip for consumers. Proper use of encryption and checksums with a Xiaomi server would stop consumers doing whatever they want to do at a low-level EDL mode.
Either way, I think there should be a restore tool capable of doing something. It would decrease Xiaomi's support burdens and stop consumers needing to crack open expensive devices; most likely with damage in the process.
I'd be happy for Xiaomi to be gatekeepers if there's no secure way of doing it. If a consumer can verify evidence of the phone, receipt and situation - surely it's better, cheaper (and friendly to environment) to fix that situation via remote auth than go the route of a repair center? Assuming Xiaomi repair unlocked bricks - if they don't that's potentially a lot of grossly unnecessary e-waste if a consumer can't fix it themselves.
I just find it comparable to installing Windows but your whole PC becomes junk because you installed the Chinese version (which is unheard of). I know on phones however it's essentially the equivalent of tampering with a motherboard BIOS - but most end-users are mostly interested in ROMs, ergo the OS - so it's still comparable to the prior analogy.
It is a real risky thing these days to unlock phones. I wish if phone companies were good and gave us timely security and OS updates, nobody would actually have to unlock their phones. But sadly it's not the case. They are greedy and want people to buy new phones every year. Planned obsolescence or whatever it is called.
Bricking your phone is not Xiaomi's fault but the user's who deliberately unlock their device and do not know what he/she is doing without starting at first to read A LOT what unlocking and flashing stock/custom roms and/or kernels means and what the precautions are regarding partitions and encryption etc..
I was 13 years very active in the custom world of HTC and what happened there many years ago I see now happening with users here.
Many users with no experience with this matter just start flashing without knowing what they are doing because the amount of good Xiaomi smartphones has increased immense and with the tools that are now available (Xiaomi flash tools for example) there is no knowledge about ADB etc. necessary and then many people just start flashing without knowing what they exactly are doing.
It is that users own fault when they brick their phone and for those users is a blocked bootloader useful so they can't do any harm then.
Then asking Xiaomi to protect the firmware and Rom for that kind of users is the wrong way around because that kind of users must keep their bootloader locked.
That is the protection that Xiaomi and other brands provide stock and when you deliberately without enough knowledge unlock your bootloader and start flashing whatever rom/kernel is asking for problems.
So do not blame Xiaomi but the user who does not know what he/she is doing!
I can see Xiaomi want to protect their regional markets and want to try and discourage people from buying phones outside of their home market. It's s common practice and Xiaomi are far from the only company to regionalise their products.
However one thing that I would like to see Xiaomi address, which would prevent the majority of bricks, is to change the default flash option in the Mi Flash Tool.
It's just a momentary loss of concentration and many people have bricked the phone.
Other reasons of bricking the phone tend to come down to user laziness and stupidity, in not doing sufficient research in to what they are doing, so for these cases nothing needs to be addressed as it teaches these users a valuable lesson (quite often the lesson is that YouTube is not a good resource on how to flash phones).
Snah001 said:
Bricking your phone is not Xiaomi's fault but the user's who deliberately unlock their device and do not know what he/she is doing without starting at first to read A LOT what unlocking and flashing stock/custom roms and/or kernels means and what the
[CUT]
That is the protection that Xiaomi and other brands provide stock and when you deliberately without enough knowledge unlock your bootloader and start flashing whatever rom/kernel is asking for problems.
So do not blame Xiaomi but the user who does not know what he/she is doing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice rant but it is a fact that Xiaomi does not allow us to freely and easily go into EDL mode.
This is possible for example with an Axon 7 (and that makes it almost impossible to brick).
DeepAnger said:
Nice rant but it is a fact that Xiaomi does not allow us to freely and easily go into EDL mode.
This is possible for example with an Axon 7 (and that makes it almost impossible to brick).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are missing the point.
By unlocking the bootloader it is YOUR responsibility to do things right and that is exactly what I am warning users for.
It is not Xiaomi's responsibility when a user makes mistakes and brick their device.
Compare it with a car where you decide to do all your maintenance and repair yourself.
Making a mistake by putting wrong or not correct parts in let's say a clutch and the car breaks down it is your fault and not the manufacturer.
So when you "demand" free access to a Xiaoimi special account not intended for normal users but only for eligible service centers because you made a stupid mistake is way over the top.
Only thing I can advise is that when you want to fiddle around with the device with an unlocked bootloader, no matter what brand it concerns, do your research first, read everything what is necessary to safely flash roms, firmware etc. and when you enter an area where you are not familiar with stay then away from it.
Fiddling around with an unlocked device is always at your own risk and do not blame the manufacturer when you bricked it.
Robbo.5000 said:
However one thing that I would like to see Xiaomi address, which would prevent the majority of bricks, is to change the default flash option in the Mi Flash Tool.
It's just a momentary loss of concentration and many people have bricked the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. 100% this. I think this is a major cause of a lot of problems. Even the most experienced user could potentially overlook it and end up with a nasty situation on their hands. This is partly why I delete the bat/sh scripts for flash_all_and_lock; factory, etc. so even if I somehow didn't do my over-observative check of the 'lock' radio buttons, it wouldn't go through anyway.
People have been accidentally locking their bootloader while using MI Flash for as long as I've owned Xiaomi phones. The fact that Xiaomi chose not to fix MI Flash so it isn't so easy to accidentally lock the bootloader despite years of complaints from Xiaomi owners who bricked their phones can only mean Xiaomi decided to allow it to keep happening.
While Xiaomi still allows bootloader unlocking they clearly don't encourage it and they also clearly have no interest in helping customers who brick their phones after unlocking.
When the bootloader is accidentally relocked Xiaomi tech support can bind the user account to the device which allows their bootloader unlock tool to work and the owner to recover their device and boot up again--but finding anyone at Xiaomi support who will actually do that is pretty much like winning the lottery.
I'm a fan of Xiaomi phones but I've also owned them long enough to know if you brick your phone you're on your own.