Related
Alrighty people.....my phone is currently running on Z's FreeX10 Beta 2, which the title actually implies ;D
You probably have noticed that the LEDs between the hardware buttons are "kind of" disfunctional and thus do not work properly. A way to get them to work is to play with the automatic brightness settings, which eventually causes the LEDs to work (at least for a while). By this i mean that they quit working immediately after you lock the screen and will not start working again by simply unlocking the screen.
Just to clarify and to prevent any flaming:
--> I did read through all threads concerning the 2.2 ROM (ALL of them, i've probably browsed through them for at least a hundred times by now)
--> I did see people posting questions concerning this topic
--> I did use the search function and even google to find clues how to fix this (no success)
--> last but not least, i do know this is not an issue of great importance and that there are bigger problems to be dealt with. i just thought it'd be nice to gather info and maaaaybeee to get this bug fixed (if you may call it like that).
So, no rush, possibly, there might be someone around here with an idea, or the proper knowledge, to get the LEDs to work properly (i'd love to have them working, i do kind of like them ;D)
So finally, if anybody has an idea, just let me/the others know, there are surely others that are interested in this topic.
I've started to have a closer look at the build.prop of Z's 2.2, even at SE's 2.1 build.prop to find some clues - nope, i probably do not have sufficient skills to find an adequate solution (in J's 2.1 custom rom, the LEDs do work)!
Thank you for contributing,
regards, Paddy
EDIT: Since this topic concerns firmware, modifications and collecting thoughts, i posted it in the development section. If i've posted this thread in the wrong section, i am truly sorry, or if it seems improper, a mod can feel free to remove it.
The Rom is in development these bugs are reported and dev are working on them, wait for updates
sent from my Commodore 64
chiefy009 said:
The Rom is in development these bugs are reported and dev are working on them, wait for updates
sent from my Commodore 64
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i do know that, but since nobody had supplied neither an answer/nor help, i thought maybe there is a quick fix or something.....anyways, i've been patient so far, ain't got a problem with waiting ;D
[Discussion][Poll] Do you think we need "ROM Categories" for Gingerbread releases ?
Hi all, building upon a conversation started on this thread regarding the different Gingerbread ROMs that are being currently tested/released by our much appreciated developers, I'd like to start a discussion and poll to get your opinion about the need for "ROM Categories", that is, a small group (probably 3 or 4) of "Guidelines" so developers could focus their ROMs to target specific group of users or usage of the ROM, something like:
- Performance: Getting the most juice out of your phone and getting the best score for benchmarks, but perhaps with the sacrifice of stability and/or certain functions of the handset and battery life.
- Gamer: Focused on the best graphics and GPU performance for best results in games and graphics apps, but perhaps with the sacrifice of battery life.
- Stability: Stock-like ROMs that covers ALL the functions of the handset with the best battery life and stability, but with the added value of certain tweaks that gives you that "something extra" to justify rooting your phone and installing a custom ROM so you can enjoy those (I pretty much fall into this category)
(Those are just the few that comes to my mind, I think that if this proposal actually goes through the actual categories should be agreed on by the community)
I base this proposal on the following:
1.-) I've been testing many ROMs over the last few days and I've noticed that even though there's been many developers that have released custom ROMs over the last few months, only handful of them (those guys that we all know and love) have kept working on refining their work as the different Android versions had passed by, so at this point (with the official release of Gingerbread for the P500) I think it would be possible that developers could work together and focus their work with specific goals, like having a well polished ROM for each category and keep developing those. The idea is not to pretend that developers wouldn't have freedom to do their work exactly as they want to, essentially because they are doing this because they enjoy it, not because we're hiring them to do it. What I mean is that if developers "categorize" their ROMs then either themselves (or new developers) could easily spot what categories are being underdeveloped, and make the decision like "hey... nobody is doing anything for "X" category, so I'm going to do something about it". At this point they could agree to either work together for specific goals, or work individually knowing that one of them is working on fulfilling the need on a specific category.
2.-) As far as I can tell Gingerbread 2.3 is the last official version that LG is going to release for the P500 line, so I believe that once developers get to stabilize their custom versions of it (ROMs and Kernel) the P500 community will start to fade away as we all (developers and users) start to move on the newer handsets, so I guess that probably the best legacy that we can all leave for this community would be a handful of custom ROMs that we could keep using on our phones depending on the type of use that we give to it, until it's time to move on to another handset.
3.-) Having specific categories could help a lot when it comes to testing (and gathering results of those tests), essentially because most of us on the "user side" would surely focus their testing upon the way that they use their handsets, and that would translate on more people doing the testing for a handful of ROMs, instead of everyone testing everything (which usually translates into nobody testing anything).
Well I guess that's enough to make my point, the rest is up to you all to either vote and give some comments here or just say: "Hey n00b, what the #(=$/# your're talking about dude!!!" LOL, don't worry I can live with that
We should definitely have this.
Sent from my LG-P509 (Optimus T) with Void Gear using XDA App
Well actually we do have a thread like this. The repository sticky on dev subforum. It has all the roms, kernels, guides, mods etc sorted nicely with short and informative descriptions ( Repository ) and since ciaox started to maintain the thread it is always up to date with the latest stuff. If you got any suggestions or something for repository to become better you could just post it there.
Hey everyone,
We've made a small change to this forum by giving it a different name. This is now the *default* Android development forum for Galaxy S II. Any works that are completely original will be filed in the Original Android Development forum. Everything else will go here.
We have a more long-term solution to the ROM situation in the works. It'll be a database-driven ROM upload tool that will make it super easy for users to find and rate the ROMs that you upload. You'll be hearing more about this in the coming months.
For now, please continue to provide feedback. Thank you for your help in making XDA a more organized place.
Thanks!
P.S. If you think your ROM should be placed in the Original Android Development forum, send me a PM.
Edit from noppy22: this thread is no longer relevant so I unstuck it...
Sveitus,
I am dissapointed that the original explainatory thread was closed without reason after it was collecting opposing comments. Not cool.
I believe what you've posted (not done, I am confident that this was done with some consultation, somewhere) should be discussed in a wider context.
To that end, I've opened a thread in the XDA general forum with an admittedly emotive title "First and Second Class ROMS, 1st, 2nd class users". Please track this thread, assuming it's not lost amidst the noise.
I would have posted my concerns in the original notification thread except...
What gives?
Just imagine someone from sensation comes here and sees two development threads...
Sensation owners must be jealous by now..
But why is this only done on the GALAXY S2 subforums? Please, implement this on all phone subforum. I want to see how others would react.
Still think this is a stupid idea. If devs don't want other devs recycling their works, better not publish it. Or you can just close the thread of the ROM that was derived from an another ROM without permission/due credit.
The current situation is not something new to all of us.
There were always have been such ''issues'' among the rom developers.
xda team the way you chose to work this out is not good at all.
I'm starting to think that you don't listen to the majority of the users...
You hear a few dev's that probably are jealous of others...
This is not right for the community.
I personally am not supporting anyone particularly, but you must find another solution.
giokou said:
The current situation is not something new to all of us.
There were always have been such ''issues'' among the rom developers.
xda team the way you chose to work this out is not good at all.
I'm starting to think that you don't listen to the majority of the users...
You hear a few dev's that probably are jealous of others...
This is not right for the community.
I personally am not supporting anyone particularly, but you must find another solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I 100% support this view...
If this is the case, then no custom roms should be in "original" section, as they are all derived from the stock manufacturer's roms.
khein said:
But why is this only done on the GALAXY S2 subforums? Please, implement this on all phone subforum. I want to see how others would react.
Still think this is a stupid idea. If devs don't want other devs recycling their works, better not publish it. Or you can just close the thread of the ROM that was derived from an another ROM without permission/due credit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All hell would break lose and their would be a mass exodus of developers and some pissed off members.
And why was the other thread closed. Perhaps XDA didn't like that all the negative PR they were getting. This plan was poorly conceived and executed. And to make it worse, XDA is being the judge, jury and executioner.
I am quite disappointed that this unjustified separation and disqualification of some devs work is still not corrected. You justified your step by "feedback" asking for it. I believe you are severely misleading people here.
You earned a lot of justified feedback in the first thread being deleted meanwhile and still you don't get things sorted out.
It is obviously totally wrong to piss off devs and force them to prove they are not guilty of what you may think. It ought to be the other way around: you should have a prove to claim what you state before you behave (and take action) the way you did. Some kind of US wild west mentality around here. I understand when people think that you only try to protect some of the devs being closer to you or being longer active on xda than some others. The selection of Roms being put to one or the other section proves that already since there seems to be no logic behind your decisions. Some early birds being put to the second class thread while some others who have just released quite usual stuff but were active with other hardware before have been put to the first class thread. And till now no kind of explanation why this or that Rom has been put here or there? What about Litenin e.g. which has been asked for a dozen times in the first, deleted thread ?
And above all: what kind of guilt do you think of ?
We are talking about open source here and all Roms are derived from Samsung stuff except for CM / MIUI. So where does originality start and where does it end? And who may decide: Even if a custom ROM was copied from another custom one in the first step it might have become an own developement over time.
jlevy73 said:
All hell would break lose and their would be a mass exodus of developers and some pissed off members.
And why was the other thread closed. Perhaps XDA didn't like that all the negative PR they were getting. This plan was poorly conceived and executed. And to make it worse, XDA is being the judge, jury and executioner.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The other thread was closed because it was a discussion on the Derived ROMs Forum format, which as you state wasn't what we hoped it would be. So, changed the forum format. The old discussion was closed and a new one started to discuss this iteration. The thread was also started and stuck by svetius.
zikarus said:
I am quite disappointed that this unjustified separation and disqualification of some devs work is still not corrected. You justified your step by "feedback" asking for it. I believe you are severely misleading people here.
You earned a lot of justified feedback in the first thread being deleted meanwhile and still you don't get things sorted out.
It is obviously totally wrong to piss off devs and force them to prove they are not guilty of what you may think. It ought to be the other way around: you should have a prove to claim what you state before you behave (and take action) the way you did. Some kind of US wild west mentality around here. I understand when people think that you only try to protect some of the devs being closer to you or being longer active on xda than some others. The selection of Roms being put to one or the other section proves that already since there seems to be no logic behind your decisions. Some early birds being put to the second class thread while some others who have just released quite usual stuff but were active with other hardware before have been put to the first class thread. And till now no kind of explanation why this or that Rom has been put here or there? What about Litenin e.g. which has been asked for a dozen times in the first, deleted thread ?
And above all: what kind of guilt do you think of ?
We are talking about open source here and all Roms are derived from Samsung stuff except for CM / MIUI. So where does originality start and where does it end? And who may decide: Even if a custom ROM was copied from another custom one in the first step it might have become an own developement over time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thread hasn't been deleted, it's been closed. The reasons (while obvious) are above.
Clearer..
<sarcasm>
This titling does make it clearer..
Example:
Original Development: CM7
It's built from the ground up with a myriad of coded additions to be a truly 'Original' product.
Development: Everything else
All other ROMS are stock deodexed upgrades.
</sarcasm>
Don't like this idea...
DaveShaw said:
The thread hasn't been deleted, it's been closed. The reasons (while obvious) are above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Closed or deleted - did not see it but no big difference anyway.
And there is nothing obvious neither about the closing nor the separation.
If you like to install a new tool do so. Build it, introduce it. Till then leave things as they were, stop separation and maybe excuse for the mess you produced by an unbiased decision... My 5 ct
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
I really don't understand what an "original ROM" is. Google wrote the only original Android ROM imho.
here's a thought.
Villain Rom Lite is in "original" even though it's clearly based off VillainRom.
There's CLEAR favoritism going on here.
It should either be merged with the original or moved. It's just the same ROM with removed apps. How is that "original"?
Simple Result:
As far as I see; Some devs are out of business and as far as I feel, more to be...
mynameisjon said:
here's a thought.
Villain Rom Lite is in "original" even though it's clearly based off VillainRom.
There's CLEAR favoritism going on here.
It should either be merged with the original or moved. It's just the same ROM with removed apps. How is that "original"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uhm actually the fact that thread was buried a few pages until yesterday meant svetius may have missed it. Moved it across.
That's grand, we don't have derivated roms anymore, we have originals and others (stolen, fakes, not so cool). I like the way mods are listening...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
I must admit, the way the mods have chosen to separate the two development sections doesn't sit well with me at all. The criteria for which section a ROM goes in to is very subjective and open to various interpretations, all of which are prone to the moderator's possible bias.
Strictly speaking, only one or two ROMs are 'original development' and belong in that section. All the others are derivatives in some way or another.
A better way to clean up the dev forum would be to have a couple of sub-sections; perhaps one for all ROMs (regardless of source), one for kernels and related modifications and another for android-specific modifications. Then, be strict about enforcing the sub-section criteria. Also, ask ROM chefs to state in their OP whether the ROM is based on another ROM and to credit the original developer/chef.
Everything else goes in Themes & Apps.
Also, having a mandatory format for thread titles (a la the HD2 forum) is an excellent way to keep things tidy and ensure that people know when a new release has been posted and what the releases are based upon. It worked over in HD2 rather well I thought. After coming from an HD2 to the S2, I thought that the S2 forums were a little untidy to say the least.
Ok, serious mode off, back to my usual sarcastic self.
OK, I dont agree with the splitting of the forums, but its not my decision and will go along with it. One thing that does really annoy me and needs to be fixed is that this new forum doesnt show up on the android app. Can that be fixed? I like keeping up with a few roms here and am usually on the move.
TheBishopOfSoho said:
OK, I dont agree with the splitting of the forums, but its not my decision and will go along with it. One thing that does really annoy me and needs to be fixed is that this new forum doesnt show up on the android app. Can that be fixed? I like keeping up with a few roms here and am usually on the move.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No harm in disagreeing! If enough people disagree, the mods may relent on this decision.
Guys (and girls ... if any are reading .. )
After some tinkering about (for days now) with Mango build 7720 (Thanks again YUKI + XBOXMOD!) I can confirm that the many of the issues present in Mango Beta are now gone ... Ok granted the MicroSD gets encrypted but its not meant to be removed on an original WP7! You can refer to Yuki's thread on how to unlock your MicroSD card if you don't fancy the likes Microsofts OS and want to revert back to Android .....
Now, it's a known fact that multitouch is an issue together with sound and camera. I was unable to find solutions to this issue. This thread seeks to ask / reply and hopefully implement some of the issues which remain for us to make the HD2 and hopefully run Android and WP7 natively without the abstraction layer present in the secondary bootloaders.
Question 1 - I am aware that CLK runs android only. Are the sound / camera / and multitouch issues present in WP7 also present in Android NAND roms running on CLK ?
Question 2 - How possible is it to modify CLK to run WP7 if the answer to above is NO?
Question 3 - If the issue iies in the secondary bootloader drivers (if any) ... Is there a way to modify/contribute for further development on them?
If we resolve these the HD2 would truly be a remarkable piece of hardware running virtually any OS. Presently the multitouch issue kills some of the enjoyment on WP7 ... and the source sound input gain is too high.
I really wish if we could get some serious thread going and if anyone is confident that he/she can help resolving the driver issue, feel free to pm me. I am a software developer (c#) if this can help in any way. Have been using it some years now on a daily basis. I am willing to provide my help. I hope that anyone could help along maybe we create yet another open source bootloader which does the trick.
Hoping to hear from you so we get something going ...
Regards
Al
I would really like to hear from some devs I am more than sure that the community would be very grateful.
Secondly (courtesy of warriorvibhu)
I suggest that you all Sign this Petition.. Kindly inform all fellow HD2 owners to sign it ... especially if they were impressed by WP7 on HD2.
Alcatrazx said:
Guys (and girls ... if any are reading .. )
Now, it's a known fact that multitouch is an issue together with sound and camera. I was unable to find solutions to this issue. This thread seeks to ask / reply and hopefully implement some of the issues which remain for us to make the HD2 and hopefully run Android and WP7 natively without the abstraction layer present in the secondary bootloaders.
Question 1 - I am aware that CLK runs android only. Are the sound / camera / and multitouch issues present in WP7 also present in Android NAND roms running on CLK ?
No there are some issues in camera and sound with android but is related to incomplete kernel. They are not related to each other for example no multi touch issues on android. All those issues are related to not perfect drivers hd7 is using another touchscreen panel I guess and maybe different speakers and camera. Anyway those drivers are complexed to write because we dont get source from microsoft on how to write them.
Question 2 - How possible is it to modify CLK to run WP7 if the answer to above is NO?
Theoritically yes but CLK is designed to load an linux kernel. So if we want that we need to write a complete new bootloader.
Question 3 - If the issue iies in the secondary bootloader drivers (if any) ... Is there a way to modify/contribute for further development on them?
Yes but you need to go backt to Windows 6.5 and read out the current drivers and port them to windows phone 7 properly. But you will need a JTAG for it and you must be very skilled.
If we resolve these the HD2 would truly be a remarkable piece of hardware running virtually any OS. Presently the multitouch issue kills some of the enjoyment on WP7 ... and the source sound input gain is too high.
I really wish if we could get some serious thread going and if anyone is confident that he/she can help resolving the driver issue, feel free to pm me. I am a software developer (c#) if this can help in any way.
Hoping to hear from you so we get something going ...
Regards
Al
Question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope this make some stuff clear.
You talk about a sound issue.
If your talking about the sound being too high, then a cab can be downloadeed to fix this. Doesnt limit the maximum volume, just reduces the minimum and puts bigger steps in placce.
We need an asm developer for try to fix multitouch problem... or the source code of driver...
Multi-touch is a bit better for me (don't know if the games which need two screen pressure work I didn't tried yet) but in Bing Maps and IE9 it's working most of the time.
Just hope that's will come soon, I cant wait it !
However, I also hope the Mango will worked with flash and include more apps in the marketplace.
Fisher_9511 said:
Multi-touch is a bit better for me (don't know if the games which need two screen pressure work I didn't tried yet) but in Bing Maps and IE9 it's working most of the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not working in any of multitouch Games.
Nice thread,curious to See the answers, definitely camera is a big issue for me, hope it get fixed soon.
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
Dont forget the need to use the "batterytrick"
good thread by the way
Unfortunately the thread won't lead to anywhere. Development on WP7/7.5 is not like development on Android. WP7 is closed source and so is the drivers.
So unless HTC themselves step in or a developer hacks new drivers up(which won't happen). We'll never see a native WP7.
We're using all the stuff that was leaked from the original LEO ROM. Also, CLK with WP7/7.5 boot support would not change this. And no, all these problems are not present in Android. But that's because the developers have more tools and open source code to work with, something we don't have.
Try to think positive man... Have you ever seen the arm listed file? We need to find a timer between the two finger... would not be so so so hard... but only hard...XD
TonyCubed said:
Unfortunately the thread won't lead to anywhere. Development on WP7/7.5 is not like development on Android. WP7 is closed source and so is the drivers.
So unless HTC themselves step in or a developer hacks new drivers up(which won't happen). We'll never see a native WP7.
We're using all the stuff that was leaked from the original LEO ROM. Also, CLK with WP7/7.5 boot support would not change this. And no, all these problems are not present in Android. But that's because the developers have more tools and open source code to work with, something we don't have.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi and thanks for the feedback. With a negative attitude the thread will lead to nowhere yes. That was what people said a year ago when they said that WP7 will never run on the HD2 but the devs ultimately got there. Thanks for answering the question re the Android drivers though.
You are RIGHT that the drivers in WP7 are closed source drivers ... so is MAGLDR. Rewriting another bootloader (if needed) which does not have all the frills of MAGLDR but which is open source could be a possibility.
I am not interested in getting into the WP7 ROM and modifying the drivers built in ... We have to use a technique similar to what they use when creating emulators by reverse engineering ... The most die hard emulators out there such as some of the Playstation emus out there were all closed source but it did not stop the devs from doing a proper emulation of the console.
I'd really appreciate if you could be more specific when you said that we are using the stuff which was leaked from the original "LEO" ROM ... as far as I know, is it not the Schubert which was leaked? Correct me if I'm wrong ... We got too far to give up just now...
Multitouch games do not work .. with the current Multitouch driver .. mainly due to the finger position bug .... This is explained in detail on youtube.
Sound is distorted because the input gain is too high ...
Let's not speak about the camera for now ... I think those are the two major issues which need to be remedied for now. Hopefully this thread will get us somewhere.
Regards
Al
Good initiative ! I hope we can make things work.
Also for those with the negative attitude...if you dont have anything good to say...dont say !
backlashsid said:
Good initiative ! I hope we can make things work.
Also for those with the negative attitude...if you dont have anything good to say...dont say !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nicely said and many thanks
You talk about a sound issue.
If your talking about the sound being too high, then a cab can be downloadeed to fix this. Doesnt limit the maximum volume, just reduces the minimum and puts bigger steps in placce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is not exactly fixing the issue... It just modifies the maxima and minima ... The sound (input gain) is too high making it sound distorted from the HD2. The fix does remedy this a bit but its ... erm not really fixing the problem.
do think this would be a good idea, but its not being negative pointing out the obvious issue, its being realistic.
you see the point you made on MAGLDR and WP7 running of the HD2 is mute, and im not sure you fully understand its use, there are fundamental differences in making WP7 believe the HD2 is a native device and changing the actual drivers, you see, the SPL for the HD2 was opened up a long time ago with HSPL to be put in place which pretty much allowed us to do anything, the next critical piece was MAGLDR, which sat on top of the HSPL which gave us the potential to install android then WP, both HSPL and MAGLDR are very much programed by folk on here, they were not "hacked" or copied, they are closed source as you put it but they are built for a purpose of doing exactly what they do, enable custom ROMs, for WM, Android and WP to install. But that’s not the issue, the issue is a driver
To be clearer on the matter, IF WP7 had never been tested on the HD2 initially then we would never have had it.
The reasons for the bugs we talk about are because we have test drivers that were never supposed to see the end user. Had we not had that opportunity with the drivers on the HD2 then we would have been up the creek with it.
There are only a number of possibilities to get what we want
•HTC/OEMs go out of their way to finish the HD2 WP7 drivers and give them to use
•HTC/OEMs gives us the Relevant code and tools to do it ourselves
•We find native Windows phone devices that uses EXACTLY the same hardware which we can borrow
•Finally, the wildcard, someone who happens to know how to program for the hardware in question comes to help us.
That is it im afraid, its not being negative, you want to know what we need to do, well, there you go, the chances of HTC etc helping us are almost non-existent, finding devices with the same hardware, well i think we have more of a chance of HTC giving us them, BUT thats more to do with the very old digitiser we have, less so with the other hardware elements, so there is a possibility there.
Finding someone who can actually build a driver from the ground up? its possible, but short of putting adverts out on every developer website asking for help its not likely we will find one from this thread alone.
dazza9075 said:
do think this would be a good idea, but its not being negative pointing out the obvious issue, its being realistic.
you see the point you made on MAGLDR and WP7 running of the HD2 is mute, and im not sure you fully understand its use, there are fundamental differences in making WP7 believe the HD2 is a native device and changing the actual drivers, you see, the SPL for the HD2 was opened up a long time ago with HSPL to be put in place which pretty much allowed us to do anything, the next critical piece was MAGLDR, which sat on top of the HSPL which gave us the potential to install android then WP, both HSPL and MAGLDR are very much programed by folk on here, they were not "hacked" or copied, they are closed source as you put it but they are built for a purpose of doing exactly what they do, enable custom ROMs, for WM, Android and WP to install. But that’s not the issue, the issue is a driver
To be clearer on the matter, IF WP7 had never been tested on the HD2 initially then we would never have had it.
The reasons for the bugs we talk about are because we have test drivers that were never supposed to see the end user. Had we not had that opportunity with the drivers on the HD2 then we would have been up the creek with it.
There are only a number of possibilities to get what we want
•HTC/OEMs go out of their way to finish the HD2 WP7 drivers and give them to use
•HTC/OEMs gives us the Relevant code and tools to do it ourselves
•We find native Windows phone devices that uses EXACTLY the same hardware which we can borrow
•Finally, the wildcard, someone who happens to know how to program for the hardware in question comes to help us.
That is it im afraid, its not being negative, you want to know what we need to do, well, there you go, the chances of HTC etc helping us are almost non-existent, finding devices with the same hardware, well i think we have more of a chance of HTC giving us them, BUT thats more to do with the very old digitiser we have, less so with the other hardware elements, so there is a possibility there.
Finding someone who can actually build a driver from the ground up? its possible, but short of putting adverts out on every developer website asking for help its not likely we will find one from this thread alone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ur right...man sometimes i so feel like bombarding Drew Bamford (product design HTC) emails about windows phone 7 and androi on HD2 and force him to be convinced to make drivers for us....its our right
but then again...can we really ???
backlashsid said:
ur right...man sometimes i so feel like bombarding Drew Bamford (product design HTC) emails about windows phone 7 and androi on HD2 and force him to be convinced to make drivers for us....its our right
but then again...can we really ???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say... let's do this! If we get enough people, and those will send emails like everyday, then why not? There's nothing to lose
IF, and its a big IF, we are going to get it working better its going to need ideas like the comment from backlashsid to get unofficial support from these companies
In my humble opinion there is little chance of getting anything else working better without the support of people in the loop, essentially that means HTC and Qualcomm, but remember that by getting the HD2 running WP7 we are costing them money in lost sales, so there is little incentive for them to support us in an official capacity, what we're looking for is an insider!
it doesnt hurt hunting for new devices with the same hardware but its unlikely anyone would use old gear.
This would be nice so then we (as the community of XDA) can show off our HD2's as the beast-mode phone and bestest phone ever!
Right now I have been reading up on talk about future integration of a HID profile that would allow for HID devices like keyboards, mice, game controllers ect to connect to android.
I have found a possible source that makes it seem possible to integrate into the roms. If cyanogenmod can integrate this into their rom, why wouldn't it be possible with the current roms.
I for the most part understand what needs to done and what is involved but with no knowledge on how to go about doing it.
Can this be done?....
http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Android-Adding_Bluetooth_Profile
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
1. We should probably wait for a solid AOSP ROM before we start worrying about adding in something like Bluetooth profiles.
2. When you don't actually know anything about creating a mod (just repeating what you've said in your post, not trying to be offensive) that you post in the dev section, it really shouldn't go here. I would have suggested General, it's fairly active, and you'll probably get a better response.
3. More than even posting it in general, you'd probably get the most productive response if you PMed a CM maintainer, or tweeted to Toast's Twitter or something more direct.
Ahem,
It appears that I AM a moderator, and i dont care for petty squabbling, i mean, come on guys knock it off.
As this is a possible mod, im moving this thread and cleaning it up.
Please behave guys!
timmymarsh said:
Ahem,
It appears that I AM a moderator, and i dont care for petty squabbling, i mean, come on guys knock it off.
As this is a possible mod, im moving this thread and cleaning it up.
Please behave guys!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad. Have my ****s and grins now and then. Crappy work day that day.
Anyway. It looks like that incorporating a new stack in a sense rom Is pretty darn difficult. Since the hid profile Needed is stripped.
As I understand it a new stack would have to be made and modified. To work with sense.
Where as aosp its already included through Android and thats just ported to work with our phones. But maybe a new Bluetooth stack can be ported to a sense ROM someday.
But keep it open, maybe a skilled dev Can crank it out someday.
I'm going to contact toast or maybe a dev on the cyanogen team and maybe they can educate me a little if this can be done on sense or not
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Since this is such a large project it might be worth it to try to get devs together from all the various htc phones. If it could be done it would benefit all of the htc phones. As far as I know there is no advantage to using HTC's bluetooth vs aosp.