Is this even possible? I think that device has a potential. It's the crappy software that is preventing me from purchasing it. It would be nice if someone developed true android ports for those cheap Chinese mobile phones so poor college students like myself who do not wish to be locked to a contract can get a cheap phones. I finally found that the Airphone has a processor with the following specs:
Mtek MT6235 ARM9 core, 208MHz Speed CPU
I read somewhere that Android needs at least 200mhz to run, so this processor should be able to support it, right? I am interested in getting into the mobile hacking scene for Android, but I do not know where to begin. If I purchased this mobile phone (its cheap, I can get it for 89$) which tools would I require to begin hacking it?
Yes, I know this mobile phone does not have 3G, but I have no use for that technology on a phone because I have other means of accessing the internet. I like this mobile because it is very very slim, about the same size as my ipod touch. I know so many other people would purchase this phone if it had android instead of the sucky iPhoney OS.
Many thanks!
So many views yet no replies. Do you think I would have better luck asking this in the Official Google Android developer forum? Or is this type of chinese technology as unknown and elusive as I figured it would be?
if the mtek run winmobile
you can try to start android whit haret
i think that the cpu is the same of htc opal(omap 850)
look here
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/wing-linux/wiki
It doesnt run windows mobile unfortunately. It runs a weird OS called "MTK OS", which apparently is a modified version of Nucleus OS.
Hey thanks for your responses! I will take this to the Official Google Android Forum.
Looking to for something like Airphones
I want to play the video on my pc monitor
and steam the audio of this video on my android phone to listen with headphones
linux port
Hello,
some russian guys made a linux port to MT6235 (Google: Linux'у на MT6235 быть (инструкция прилагается))
Starting an Android kernel would be trivial, but RAM is not enough, so Android on MT6235 is useless.
Hey there, i hope i`m right in here and you pros can answer me some questions.
We are currently building a new software which will be released soon, i won`t go into details in here, because we not ready to release some infos about it yet. Anyway, thats not the problem....
Here is my question: Our Software could expand to TVs and now we are searching on how to get our solution onto TV Screens. We cam across all those Android based TV Boxes, we ordered some and tested them, unfortunatly they didn`t offer everything we needed.
Sooo, is it possible to release a custom Android Installation on such a Box?
What if we get the blank hardware boxes, can we get an Android Installation up and running? (With the paid help of some XDA-Developers..)
We would really need a stripped down Version only with our APP and some other stuff running.
Also another question, if it is possible to release a custom box, is it legal to Google`s Terms?
We are brand new in this field, so please be so kind and help us out. If it is possible and we can implement this thing we are definitly will be going over xda-developers, because we just don`t have any clue about Android Systems.
Are you meaning something like this?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/244278/meet_cotton_candy_the_dualcore_android_usb_device.html
We all know that Android is flexible enough to be put on phones, tablets, laptops, and TVs. FXI, a technology lab based in Norway, decided to add USB drives to Android’s host of platforms.
FXI’s Cotton Candy USB device might look like any other flash drive, but it packs smartphone parts like a dual-core 1.2GHz Samsung Exynos processor and its own ARM GPU for 1080p video playback. It also has lots of connectivity, including Wi-Fi, HDMI, Bluetooth, and a MicroSD card slot to expand its 1GB of storage.
This Raspberry Pi-eqsue miniature PC comes with Android 2.3 (also known as Gingerbread). When you plug it into a PC or Mac, it automatically bring up a separate pop up for the Gingerbread OS. This functionality could be used to bring Android apps or games to any computer. Alternatively, if your HDTV has HDMI ports, you could potentially turn it into a smart, Internet-connected monitor.
Angry Birds might be a little hard to play on your TV. [Photo: FXI]
The only down side of the device is that it is not supported by Google, so you won’t be browsing the marketplace anytime soon. Instead, FXI is working to get a third-party app store together. For now, though, you'll have to side-load any apps you want to run on it.
FXI is in talks with other companies to bring Cotton Candy to market by the second half of 2012 and predict that the device will cost "well under $200" according to The Verge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MoPhoACTV Initiative
Yes, thats also this kind of thing we might need. But currently we are more looking into these kind of Boxes: cect-shop.com/Android-TV-Box_c55_x1.htm
And we would need a custom Android installation on one of these boxes? As asked above, is this possible and legal?
Why android?
i don't know the exact details about, but I think getting regular linux to run on a set op box is easier and cheaper to customize with exactly the software you want it.
It doesn`t have to be Android. Andorid was just a possible solution we found and the other reason is that i`m capable of programming apps for Android so it was the closest possibility.
You say Linux...hmm... also a possible solution.
Lets tell you at least some details. The Box should run only with our application, and should be able to be connected to a TV where the application is started then and does their thing. It`s a specialized kind of Software Application for targeted companys.
What it should be able to do:
At least an output resolution of 1280 * 720
Connectable with HDMI, DVI etc. to Televisions
As you say Linux, are you capable of doing such a thing? We might need you...
Or do you have some resources where we can find some developer who can achieve this?
surekin said:
It doesn`t have to be Android. Andorid was just a possible solution we found and the other reason is that i`m capable of programming apps for Android so it was the closest possibility.
You say Linux...hmm... also a possible solution.
Lets tell you at least some details. The Box should run only with our application, and should be able to be connected to a TV where the application is started then and does their thing. It`s a specialized kind of Software Application for targeted companys.
What it should be able to do:
At least an output resolution of 1280 * 720
Connectable with HDMI, DVI etc. to Televisions
As you say Linux, are you capable of doing such a thing? We might need you...
Or do you have some resources where we can find some developer who can achieve this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think any experienced linux dev is capable of doing such a thing, not that difficult. Get a good supported distro, remove all the bells and whistles and let it just boot to your application. I think that is the most elegant solution. Android is much more difficult to customize in such a way. I might have the technical skills to pull it off, but I'm not interested, sorry.
It all depends on your needs and resources. Try googling for embedded linux. linuxfordevices.com is a good place to start i think.
Why the choice for a setopbox and not a regular application? In call centers and other businesses normal programs are used to display information on a large screen, while running on a regular OS. The cost of having to develop and deliver support on not only the software, but also on the setopbox and its embedded OS is quite large. You have to take that into account. Given that you post this question on this forum, I suspect that your resources are rather limited. If I were you, I would reconsider the choice for a setop box.
First, thx for your time...and second, i understand what you mean in your post, but our software already runs on Mac OS, Windows and iOs, so we already have an application running. The settopbox would just be an addition, because some of our customers might need such a thing. Thats the reason why i`m doggling around searching for some ideas.
Our resources are limited sure, but not too limited, the reason why i posted here, is because i`m searching for answers here too, and xda is always a good place to ask in my opinion. We are going other ways too, let me make that clear!
So, i understand what you meant by Linux, i am now contacting some Linux devs who might want to achieve this.
Thx!
Hello everyone,
I have a Erisin S2046B in my 2001 BMW E46 and found information, that the RK3188 has several external buses which are partly currently not used in the device. Being an electrical engineer and having some projects in my mind which require some sort of external communication to e.g. microcontrollers, I would like to make use of them.
Did anyone go through the effort to use one of these interfaces?
I read in the sound processor thread (http://forum.xda-developers.com/and.../mtc-sound-controlling-bd37xxx-sound-t3234660), that I2C is used there but only limited information on what is done exactly, as it is just a matter of reconnecting the bus lines from the mcu to the rk3188.
I'm not quite sure, if this is the right section, but I would not really consider this "software development". Anyway, if one finds it inappropriate, I would kindly ask a mod to move it to another section
This is great, hopefully it's with guys like yourself tinkering away at these devices we end up with a how new sub-section of interesting mods that can be done for those that like to take stock and improve on it..
Bookmarked for reading as you go through this ... Look forward to some.positive outcomes...
@LC4T, can you be more clear as to what do you plan to achieve? It is no problem to attach another slave (or more) to existing I2C bus, as this bus is a multi-slave in its nature. There's no need to find any interfaces not in use, you are free to use existing, well known one.
As I already mentioned in my posting, I personally plan to connect an external microcontroller and exchange data between the µC and the RK3188. As I don't want to fit the circuitry inside the erisin enclosure, I2C is not the preferable solution.
The principle of I2C and its architecture is known to me, I have already build hardware using I2C But as the existing I2C bus is already connected to at least one slave device, I would be careful with hooking up another one without knowing exactly, what's happening on the bus already. Worst case would be to make the whole existing system unstable. I'd rather use SPI oder UART for my purpose.
In general, this thread should not be seen limited to my intentional use but some sort of collection of information on which buses are present, usable and in use - knowledge base style, so to speak
What's the first solution that comes to your mind when you think of doing something interesting with your I2C?
Some of these units do CANBUS. I'm not sure if there is separate hardware in them or just hookups.
I plan on installing an engine block heater (webasto thermo top c). With the universal wiring kit and control unit, you're only able to set three starting times with a fixed heating time. Additional control units for remote control are quite limited in range and functionality, the "cheap ones" (~200€) only offer "start" and "stop" with the only feedback if the command reached the unit being a blinking led, the ones with the ability to set the starting time from the distance (they claim it works up to 1km depending on the building density) is 350€... There are also GSM units available but also quite expensive and with few functions.
So including a microcontroller would fix all that
If I got it right, the CAN unit is a standalone device, that only decodes relevant data (e.g. gearbox in reverse), so no communication with the android device itself
LC4T said:
I plan on installing an engine block heater (webasto thermo top c). With the universal wiring kit and control unit, you're only able to set three starting times with a fixed heating time. Additional control units for remote control are quite limited in range and functionality, the "cheap ones" (~200€) only offer "start" and "stop" with the only feedback if the command reached the unit being a blinking led, the ones with the ability to set the starting time from the distance (they claim it works up to 1km depending on the building density) is 350€... There are also GSM units available but also quite expensive and with few functions.
So including a microcontroller would fix all that
If I got it right, the CAN unit is a standalone device, that only decodes relevant data (e.g. gearbox in reverse), so no communication with the android device itself
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe there are can bus controllers for that device.
You could take a look at IOIO-OTG boards. it might offer some features.
You can make your own can bus for the devices you want to control and use available can bus adapters.
If you're talking about the webasto heater, yes, there are control units with CAN functionality but they are OEM specific (e.g. VW/Audi, Mercedes, BMW,...) and not universal. Also, adding just another interface is not what I intended to do when there are several of them, mostly unused already available
Again: I don't want to use this thread for my specific problem but as a general thread on using the interfaces already present in the unit
LC4T said:
If you're talking about the webasto heater, yes, there are control units with CAN functionality but they are OEM specific (e.g. VW/Audi, Mercedes, BMW,...) and not universal. Also, adding just another interface is not what I intended to do when there are several of them, mostly unused already available
Again: I don't want to use this thread for my specific problem but as a general thread on using the interfaces already present in the unit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. Sure. I like the idea of tapping into the onboard hardware, but it might be good to talk about the limitations and optimal use cases for doing so.
For your case I think you can solve your need without tapping in if the objective is to get it working quickly. If the geek factor is more important then its a moot point.
You could probably tap in using something like this:
sandboxelectronics.com/?product=active-i2c-long-cable-extender-p82b715-module
That might help cut down on noise if you want to run it around the car.
Here's my thoughts.
If you need to control some external DIY device, you need to go with USB ports, which are already available in our devices.
They are just designed to communicate with external world, opposite to I2C or SPI, which are designed for in-system communications only.
Here we have two options:
1. Use native USB communication:
On the headunit side - libusb library which is well-known in Linux world. It might even happen that it is already compiled into the kernel (need to check); otherwise, a libusb.ko module needs to be compiled and loaded.
Nowadays there are many microcontrollers with USB onboard for direct use; and even simpliest MCUs like AVR attiny/atmega can use USB via V-USB library (I've done some just-for-fun projects with it).
2. Use a cheap USB-Serial converter to get a new serial port on a headunit's side. On the MCU side, you'll get a standard UART, which is much simplier than USB for MCU programming.
And returning to your @LC4T idea.
Are you planning to use head unit only as a control panel for your device, so that you only need a big touch screen with a nice UI to set up your externa DIY device, then go off letting that device to work alone? Don't you plan having your head unit always turned on to track time and on/off your heater? Because latter solution is really bad, as our head units are very power hungry.
7floor said:
Here's my thoughts.
If you need to control some external DIY device, you need to go with USB ports, which are already available in our devices.
They are just designed to communicate with external world, opposite to I2C or SPI, which are designed for in-system communications only.
Here we have two options:
1. Use native USB communication:
On the headunit side - libusb library which is well-known in Linux world. It might even happen that it is already compiled into the kernel (need to check); otherwise, a libusb.ko module needs to be compiled and loaded.
Nowadays there are many microcontrollers with USB onboard for direct use; and even simpliest MCUs like AVR attiny/atmega can use USB via V-USB library (I've done some just-for-fun projects with it).
2. Use a cheap USB-Serial converter to get a new serial port on a headunit's side. On the MCU side, you'll get a standard UART, which is much simplier than USB for MCU programming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The IOIO OTG solution gets you here plus there are established libraries etc.
github.com/ytai/ioio/wiki
The OTG version allows it to be powered from the host also. That could make it easy to develop and move around.
github.com/ytai/ioio/wiki/Getting-To-Know-The-IOIO-OTG-Board
pounce said:
The IOIO OTG solution gets you here plus there are established libraries etc.
github.com/ytai/ioio/wiki
The OTG version allows it to be powered from the host also. That could make it easy to develop and move around.
github.com/ytai/ioio/wiki/Getting-To-Know-The-IOIO-OTG-Board
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From $20 for the board on AliExpress to almost $40 elsewhere? No, thanks These guys want too much for their solution. This is the price of a Raspberry PI, a complete computer.
For that price, I would prefer putting a Raspberry under dashboard, connect with WiFi, for example, and have much more flexibility than gives the IOIO.
As to IOIO - as a prototyping board it might be useful, but not for a well-finished DIY project based on a single cheap MCU with a minimum of components, where total cost of it would be much lower than cost of that board.
It is like using ATmega256-based Arduino boards for the purpose of watching a button and blinking a LED, where the $0.5 worth ATtiny13 is an overhead.
Such a boards are probably good for Hackaton events, where you have to show something working after a few hours of quick-and-dirty work, but not for thoroughly designed DIY project.
Depends on how much you value your time and what an existing product offers you for your solution. Many people aren't as price sensitive. I certainly wasn't suggesting the IOIO as the only solution, but for an open ended or more generic solution to get hardware support external to the head unit is generally fits the bill. Established libs for interacting saves some time. Nice bunch of people put it together and there have been some fun projects.
Like I mentioned before, it might be a good idea to discuss what the objective would be to adding smart hardware in the solution through, I2C, USB, bluetooth, wifi or whatever. I think the OP is looking to discuss the general idea and not super specific solutions that might lead a person to pic a very specific ic and com. Well, I know that was the purpose because the OP has redirected me to the point.
You bring up a good point though. You say you would rather put Pi under the dash. I would also for controlling things. In fact Pi or some duino realtime solution is always going to be better for interacting with an auto. This is especially the case when the purpose might be controlling something that is powered like a motor or something life critical. At this point though we are not talking about android or these head units. You are talking about perhaps the method of communication between two systems. Not really for this forum.
---------- Post added at 01:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:46 PM ----------
I'd like to have more input/output trigger wires for events. We have a backup wire, but I'd like more for other things. An example might be to support a passenger side view camera. Sure, there are ways to hack it in by switching the backup video input, but that's a simple example. Power on a wire sends an event in android on the unit.
Do we have GPIO possibility on any of these units?
CanBus via Uart?
Does anyone know how the CanBus connection works? My MTCB Unit came with an adapter box which turns some messages into external signals (like illumination, reverse), but also seems to forward messages via serial into my Head Unit. At least that's how i guess that the steering wheel buttons are working.
Now, there are some messages that i wish to interpret and send, and also some i would interpret different. My idea was to get some kind of filter (maybe software, maybe a dedicated micro controller) in between the CanBus adapter and the service on my head unit. But right now, i have no idea how to verify my understanding of the setup, since no tty device on the HU seems to directly reflect my button presses. There's one, that pours out something unreadable on key press, but this also does it if i touch the screen, so i guess that's not the CanBus adapter itself.
I suspect that the information in already interpret before it gets into the android system, and only the relevant messages are forwarded, or even pre-processed. I suspect that the only way to get to the signals is to listen on the CanBus adapters RX/TX lines, and maybe finally put an microcontroller in between. If unlucky, the adapter might also filter out messages before i can get them, and i need to access the CanBus directly.
htt p://i.imgur.com/P1QzXta.jpg?1 << CanBus Adapter
I would appreciate any hints on this topic, especially information on the CanBus Adapter.
From what I can see on the PCB and I have read about the can adapter:
The adapter itself only interprets data from either can bus or analog signals and forwards them to the android unit via some sort of serial interface, most probably UART. As you have almost no way to get an inside look into the software running on the microcontroller, I would suggest to design a seperate device, that way you can be 100% sure to get all the messages and filter yourself.
I ordered some can bus adapters to see what i can read. Maybe i will first have a look into the data on the serial line when i finished moving house and had time to unpack my gear
I have a can bus HU, when i listen to the radio or music player, i haven't information on display of my car (CLK MERCEDES). I read the new units have dual can bus and information of radio appears on car display. Ther's a way to modify my HU to dual can bus? I have to change a can bus decoder? My can bus decoder is B200.
Regards
7floor said:
.... There's no need to find any interfaces not in use, you are free to use existing, well known one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well known interfaces - that's the keyword.
For example I would like to output current FM-frequency, radio station name, song title to the existing (factory) FIS display in a car. Via CAN bus, because the display talks CAN.
Now I would at least have to know which units have CAN capability.
Yes, I could go the USB to RS232 to CAN dasy-chain-adapter route, but I consider that all but a clean solution
Oskar