Those of you who are trying the low and high CPU version, could you verify this?
I believe, they are both technically the same cab file, with the following exceptions:
-There is a difference is the timestamp (only time not date) on the Skype.exe but they are identical in size. (they seem to be built within 34 minutes of each other, on the same day)
-The key HKLM\Software\Skype\Phone\Audio\ DisableCodecs
==>Low CPU version says ILBC (internet Low Bitrate Codec,which is the compression algorithm used by skype, at least on the desktop)
==>High CPU version is blank
I have downloaded and installed the High CPU version (after uninstalling the previous version on which I attempted the same trick and noticed a difference) - I attempted to set it to "PCM" and almost immediately there is an improvement in performance. However, I cannot explain why this is the case as I am uncertain if skype uses any other codec besides iLBC. Also, if I am understanding correctly, the low CPU version just disables the compression but I wonder what codec it then uses.
I am starting wonder how different the two releases really are. Having said that, after applying the 11G tweak with the previous Skype release still on, I managed to have a 3 way conference call on skype but there was a delay in the audio reaching me but everyone could hear me clearly (except for one or two intermittent delays). I am guessing that this would imply that the decoding is either heavy on the processor or not been properly optimized for PPCs.
The only tweaks I have on my Mini S:
-11G tweak
-stop menu animations tweak
-The aforementioned skype trick
I don't have any O2 software installed (btw, I need a Java VM though and am not 100% sure what to do about that) and don't have a mini SD card. I have only installed a theme, Skype (new build for now), Total Commander,have set a custom ringtone,have 2 word documents and some tasks and contacts. That's everything on my mini s.
Skype uses two main codecs - iLBC and iSAC. iSAC is more processor intensive, and rate adapts to the available network bandwidth more effectively using in-band real-time packet messages to throttle the quality up and down. iLBC is less processor intensive, but also has lower quality. My guess is that the high CPU version of Skype is using iSAC as the first Codec of choice. The low CPU version probably only can use iLBC. Skype for the desktop supports these two Codecs, as well as others, and will negotiate with each client it connects to the best possible quality codec.
Frankly even the lowerCPU version swallows letters and the whole words untill I overclock the Wizard upto 230 MHz. I've tested both 1.1.0.15 (from iMate 2.16 ROM) and 2.0 versions.
Related
I have a small problem gays using Jam + WIFI SD + Skype!!!
I started with basic installation of Skype into SD + internet via same SD with WIFI. The result was very sad, internal calls in Skype network were fine, but during external ones (Skype Out) I could hear my opponent first 5 sec with terrible sound quality, then my Jam simply hang – I had to do soft reset :x .
After some experiments I realised that the main problem is the speed of data transaction, as well as it takes some processor power to transform analog voice in to digital and vice versa. My future installation of Skype I made into main memory and upscale processor speed up to 520. (This is the maximum power I can provide for given application After that, my JAM was not hanging anymore :? , but still the quality was too bad – dilate in voice transaction, every 5 sec I am loosing sound or getting only parts of words. The LOG check of processor speed during conversation showed 100% of activity most of the time. My idea about that situation is presence of processor power leaking because of SD WIFI usage. For example Skype Out was working fine via USB connection, no CPU up scaling, installation in SD memory. :?:
Will really appreciate if someone will share their opinion + experience according current situation.
I have no solution but I can verify your experiences. But for me even normal skype calls do not work well. Very garbled conversations.
But I haven't been able to oc my processor. I tried Hackmaster but that didn't work really well. What are you using?
Hi, I have been using Skype on a Jam for a while with no real problems other than the odd system hang etc.
It's running over a bluetooth connection (using the Bluesoleil BT stack and a Dlink BT Access point) and although I haven't used SkypeOut the sound is good.
Cheers,
Martin
As the title to this post states, the build versions for these two devices are different. Surely a ROM upgrade will not alter the version of the O/S will it?
MDA Pro: Version 5.0 OS 5.1.1700 (Build 14352.0.1.0)
Jasjar:Version 5.0 OS 5.1.1700 (Build 14354.0.1.1)
Could this be the reason for differences in performances as well as potentially different chipsets in these devices?
Some Universals seem to overclock comfortably whilst most don't, fact!
Some Universals display certain other problems (who cares which ones right now), which others don't, fact.
Readocket Hack tops out @ 520Mhz on jasjar but 624Mhz on MDAPro
It's beginning to look like it's very plausible that HTC may have used different components (with the same spec) to build the Universals and it is a fact that we're not all running the version of operating systems.
It's therefore little wonder that we are all getting such conflicting experiences of good and bad scenarios. Correct me if I've misunderstood the facts and am assuming too much here. But if we are not running identical hardware, let alone operating systems, how can there ever be a universal ROM to cure the varying types of Unversal machines?
Can anybody please shed some light on this as my understanding of these issues is limited. :wink:
No Problems on my JasJar
to expand slightly for those who haven't already read this elsewhere...
Without taking screws out and checking chip numbers, my device and mackaby007's are identical in every way (ROM, Radio, Protocol, Build Number) The only possible difference is that I didn't load any of the extended ROM. (not sure if mackaby007 did?)
However, I have no problems and mackaby007 has...one or two:!:
As he says, is there ANY explanation for this? I understand we're both using minimal amounts of software. All I have loaded at the moment is the latest versions/betas of:
Resco Explorer and Radio, TCPMP, Pocket Weather, Pocket Breeze, and at the moment PocketHackMaster. All thoughts appreciated...
Edit: (I forgot I've got a Citrix client installed too...)
Re: No Problems on my JasJar
sub69 said:
to expand slightly for those who haven't already read this elsewhere...
Without taking screws out and checking chip numbers, my device and mackaby007's are identical in every way (ROM, Radio, Protocol, Build Number) The only possible difference is that I didn't load any of the extended ROM. (not sure if mackaby007 did?)
However, I have no problems and mackaby007 has...one or two:!:
As he says, is there ANY explanation for this? I understand we're both using minimal amounts of software. All I have loaded at the moment is the latest versions/betas of:
Resco Explorer and Radio, TCPMP, Pocket Weather, Pocket Breeze, and at the moment PocketHackMaster. All thoughts appreciated...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep done that last night (minimum ROM applications install on hard reset followed by soft-reset befor the useless stuff starts to install). Then I ran the Jasjar with just TCPMP and then with HackMaster2005 installed (only). Yet it still bums out. Any suggestions anyone?
I also concur with mackaby007 and sub69 as my JasJar is now identical to sub69s (Rom revision and no external rom loaded - pushed reset button) however I am still unable to overclock the device to 624mhz in a stable fashion.
My JasJar will clock to 624mhz and will not crash however at that speed the LCD gets the occasional flash vertical line somewhere on the screen.
I put it down to the fact that this machine was designed to run at 520 no more so other components in the board layout use a lesser tollerance than if they were aiming for 624. This could be as simple as resistors capacitors transistors. If youre lucky your lesser tollerance part will be within tollerance of a better part and so will overclock better. Its kinda like blueprinting an engine. you use all standard parts but to the tightest tollerances possible and you can get great power gains, same engine same parts but picked at random produces a production engine with guaranteeable results.
Cya
Stot
Hi!
Could someone tell me what a hardware audio codec is used "inside" this device? I mean what chip is used for A/D D/A conversion in audio part. I am sure someone has already opened device.
Shortly - the problem is - in speed of operation (conversion) of waveIn and waveOut subsystem.
we are using 8kHz WAVE_FORMAT_PCM settings and
- Qtek s100 has 1.6% difference in speed of operation of OUT an IN subsystem.
- HP2210 has only 0.005% difference.
Question is simple - why? if codec (chip) has been clocked by single oscillator - how can we have such big difference in operation speed of A/D and D/A convertions - in case of Qtek?
Second question - is it hardware or software (audio drivers) problem?
what we wanna do - try to use other sample rate - maybe it will help us to achieve acceptable difference in operation speed.
a bit more details.
"Investigation" shows that
- Qtek S100 has same speed of operation of wave_IN and wave_OUT subsystem only if 44.1kHz sample rate is specified. in all other cases one of devices (IN or OUT) are working faster (produce or consume more samples) aproximately on 1-1.6%.
- irregularity of wave_X done/data_ready events or messaging is just terrible even if you "request" 2 times per second "communication" with wave device.
So it looks like OS porting or at least audio drivers in Qtek s100 was made in very bad manner.
HP 2210 on my desk working just fine - everything works as it is expected .
Does any try this?
The official Skype said it require min 312MHz CPU to run it.
Just wanna see is the performance on or not.
kowin said:
Does any try this?
The official Skype said it require min 312MHz CPU to run it.
Just wanna see is the performance on or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I overclocked my Dopod 818 pro to 276 Mhz and Skype works like magic without hassles
Cheers!
don't overclock for too long. The most feasible setting that is observed is 240MHz. Your battery wont die on your all at once and skype (low CPU) will work perfect
Be careful not to fry its motherboard!
Prophet and Skype
The only way to use skype on the prophet is too overclock...I have had success at above 216mhz
Recently I attempted Skype (at 228mhz) on the local GPRS/EGDE network ...I was able to dial/connect and receive the voice from the person I called but they were unable to hear my voice.
Anyone get Skype fully functional on a high speed network?
Prophet and Skype
The only way to use skype on the prophet is too overclock...I have had success at above 216mhz
Recently I attempted Skype (at 228mhz) on the local GPRS/EGDE network ...I was able to dial/connect and receive the voice from the person I called but they were unable to hear my voice.
Anyone get Skype fully functional on a high speed network?
kowin said:
Does any try this?
The official Skype said it require min 312MHz CPU to run it.
Just wanna see is the performance on or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is ok, I'm using now..I'm not turnup CPU is ok!!
kowin said:
Does any try this?
The official Skype said it require min 312MHz CPU to run it.
Just wanna see is the performance on or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is ok, I'm using now..I'm not turnup CPU is ok!!
Skype rear speaker / headset
Has anyone figured out how to use skype 2.0 Low CPU with a BT headset, or at least via the regular telephone speaker?
Tom
use Skype Low CPU or HighCPU for Prophet?
hi guys,
WHich Skype version is recommended?
I tried the Low-CPU version since its meant for 312MHz PPC versions
But...I can barely hear the other party. The voice seems badly distorted.
I then switched to the High-CPU version and I can hear the other part lt least.
Anyone had similar experience as above?
Cheers
FY
gunggu said:
kowin said:
Does any try this?
The official Skype said it require min 312MHz CPU to run it.
Just wanna see is the performance on or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I overclocked my Dopod 818 pro to 276 Mhz and Skype works like magic without hassles
Cheers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is so amazing....I can only overclock mine to the max of 263MHz anything more it will go bonkers Immediately.
How u manage to push it to 276MHz....any pointers?
Cheers
FY
I was able to get the original Skype that came with my Jamin working. The program is installed on a Sandisk 2gb Ultra SD card and I overclocked the processor to 240mhz.
What is more interesting than Skype is a service called SIPDiscount http://www.sipdiscount.com/en/index.html . Go to that site and sign up for 10 euros, or you can use it free for 1 minute at a time to test it.
You can run the SIP service on a program called SJPhone for PPC http://www.sjlabs.com/sjp.html download the 2003SE version for pocket pc. They work great together and you can even call out to a US land line for free! No overclocking is neccessary because it is much lighter than Skype.
I've attached a text file that explains how to set up SJPhone to work with SIPDiscount. These directions work for the normal PC computer version of SJPhone also.
Have fun :lol:
P.S. You should always use a good headset with microphone for the best sound quality, without a headset there is usually an echo.
on my JAMin with SKYPE 2.00 Higher CPU one, the other person's sound comes out of the SPEAKER PHONE, is that normal or can I somehow switch to regular earpiece
I have a JAMin overclocked to 240, using Skype latest version low cpu, and over Wifi I have a decent, usable sound quality. I haven't tried it over Gprs/Edge.
Re: use Skype Low CPU or HighCPU for Prophet?
I was using Low-CPU (312MHz) version, I can hardly hear other party also. I will try to over-clock and see if it works or not. Or should we use High CPU version? Can anybody provide us the correct version and procedures in a more systematic way?
fychan said:
hi guys,
WHich Skype version is recommended?
I tried the Low-CPU version since its meant for 312MHz PPC versions
But...I can barely hear the other party. The voice seems badly distorted.
I then switched to the High-CPU version and I can hear the other part lt least.
Anyone had similar experience as above?
Cheers
FY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't overclock my S200, but it's running Skype perfectly. I've downloaded the latest 2.0.0.51 Skype version, installed and started without any problem. I made a voice chat with my friend via Wi-Fi network, he heard me and I heard him clearly.
It's just for people who want to buy Prophet but afraid about Skype not working.
Well, in my Qtek S200 i make a shortcut to overclock the cpu to 240Mhz and run Skype. When i exit skype the cpu clock becames 180Mhz.
I tested in a wifi connection without any problems. With GPRS i haven´t testet yet, but i think GPRS doesn´t have enough upstream to make Skype work properly.
This is my 50 cents!
Regards
GPRS no, Wifi yes
For the people trying Skype over GPRS, read the FAQ before blaming the OMAP processor.
http://support.skype.com/index.php?...base&_j=subcat&_i=12'>Skype+for+Pocket+PC</a>
"Skype for Pocket PC is designed to be used with a WiFi connection. If you are using Skype for Pocket PC with GPRS, you can use instant messaging but the bandwidth does not support calling functionality."
I have no problems with Skype low_cpu over Wifi.
Matterhorn said:
What is more interesting than Skype is a service called SIPDiscount http://www.sipdiscount.com/en/index.html . Go to that site and sign up for 10 euros, or you can use it free for 1 minute at a time to test it.
You can run the SIP service on a program called SJPhone for PPC http://www.sjlabs.com/sjp.html download the 2003SE version for pocket pc. They work great together and you can even call out to a US land line for free! No overclocking is neccessary because it is much lighter than Skype.
I am trying this on a Charmer (MDA Compact II) on T Mobile UK I Have followed all the instructions and it says "No active network interface"
Please Help
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skype for ARM
Hi Guys
Well, first of all, I don't have the S200 yet, I'll get it today or on tuesday. I did some research before ordering it:
When it comes to Skype, there seems to be a lot confusion about how to run it smoothly. The problem seems to be, that Skype is compiled to run on an Intel Xscale processor. Well, as we all know, the S200 has an TI OMAP processor and that one has an ARM architecture. Search on Google a little bit, and you'll find out the differences. A TI OMAP 200MHz Processor is comparable to an Xscale 400-450MHz Processor only that the OMAP uses less power.
Naturally, ARM has a lower CPU frequency, but the benefit of it is, that it is multitasking. Xscale is a straight-forward processor, ARM does many things in parallel. This difference in architecture causes problems if one runs an Xscale Program on an ARM processor, because the program does not delegate the different tasks to the different units on the ARM, but only forwards them to the main ALU. That one, of course is overwhelmed, while the rest of the Processor doesn't know what to do.
Conclusion: Skype is for Xscale --> does not use the OMAP all the way and with all the available features (Sound ALU, WIFI ALU, ...)
What we need is a Skype that is made for the processor architecture of the S200
Search on Google and you'll find the following:
Skype for ARM
Of course it is an old version, I don't exactly know what has changed with skype, but as far as I know the protocol is still the same, so calling should not be a problem.
Anyways, I think I'll try the new Skype version first, and then the old one and will compare it.
You'll hear back from me, of cours I'll be happy if somebody else could try it as well and tell us what he or she experienced
Hi
I am Using Schaps WinMob6 with an Motorola S9 over A2DP, as soon as I start streaming the system slows down so bad that it is almost impossible to use!
Is this normal? Anyone using A2DP experiencing the same Problem? What can I do to fix this?
Grüsse,
Chris
i have experienced the same thing no matter when ROM I use. theres not a lot of settings to change so they just sit in a drawer now collecting dust.
i have experienced the same thing no matter what ROM I use. theres not a lot of settings to change so they just sit in a drawer now collecting dust.
I'm experiencing this as well with Schaps ROM. If someone got it to work without problem, please let us know.
Hmm, I don't remember this problem when I was using Schaps ROM... what app are you using to stream. I pretty much solely used Coreplayer 1.1.1 for everything though.
Definitely not having this problem with K's rom which I'm testing now. It works sweet.
If I remember correctly I tried with both WMP and PP with the same result.
I believe A2DP takes a fair amount of CPU power - first the application needs to decode the mp3, then feeds it into the virtual sound device - bluetooth stereo - whose drivers then transcode the sound into something that can fit into Bluetooth's bandwidth. The transcoding has to be done in real-time so it probably has a high priority for CPU time. I don't think I've ever used a ROM where A2DP wouldn't slow down the device, and this includes an Axim x50v @ 624 MHz.
Hi Guys,
I have the feeling that things have gotten a bit better after installing Total Commander!?
Does this make sense?
Using TCPMP with You Tub plugin ( Vids Run great unless A2DP / )
Grüsse,
Chris
kltye said:
I believe A2DP takes a fair amount of CPU power - first the application needs to decode the mp3, then feeds it into the virtual sound device - bluetooth stereo - whose drivers then transcode the sound into something that can fit into Bluetooth's bandwidth. The transcoding has to be done in real-time so it probably has a high priority for CPU time. I don't think I've ever used a ROM where A2DP wouldn't slow down the device, and this includes an Axim x50v @ 624 MHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It IS processor-intensive, particularly on Samsung CPU's, where it can easily eat 50% CPU time. This is why there's so bad a slowdown.
Read my related articles, they're all cross-posted to the Wiki here - I've elaborated a LOT on all these subjects.
mortplayer seems best for me, but yes there's always slowdown, the tcpmp thing; its the only program with which you can watch videos cleanly without skipping/slowdown via a2dp.
Darn
I just upgradet from a Magician in the hope that the Samsung would have more Power, but / On my Magician ther ist almost no Slowdown using A2DP.
Are there any aps where I can OC my Samsung?
Sadly My tcpmp skips vids using A2DP . I guess I will only be using my S9 when Joging or Biking.
Grüsse,
Chris
I'm having these probs on my 8525. No clue how to fix it. Theres a lot of storage and program memmory left on the darn phone. It used to work perfect, but suddenly had problems. The music stutters a lot with both wmp and tcpmp. I'm using the iphono minis with A2DP. These issues never existed with WM5 as far as I know, though the quality was of course lower. Perhaps the processes that up the quality of the [email protected] stream are causing a trade of in CPU/memory consumption. Maybe that means lowering the quality (maybe via a registry tweak) somewhat will alleviate the problem?
I'd recommend switching to a wired headset
I got the same issue with my A2DP headset. It's not an issue that can be fixed with tweaking. A2DP is simply CPU intensive (not memory intensive).
Lowering the bitrate would help, but not enough I'm afraid.
tweaks that help
Hey there,
I had a little trouble with helmi's wm6 (excellent rom) and the original wm5. The following link has some reg tweaks (http://forum.ppcgeeks.com/showthread.php?t=10668). It's still a little gappy, but much better. Also, the sound quality seems to be a lot better.