Database Users

Backup battery on Universal

Can anyone tell me why I can't see a display for a backup battery on my MDA Pro, previously on the Alpine I had a main battery display and a backup batt display??????????

because there is none.

i gathered that much but is there a reason, does it mean if i let my current battery run dry i will lose data because theirs no backup???

no you won't loose anything becaue the data is saved on presistent storage in all WM5 devices unlike in the case of WM2003SE where it was saved on RAM

ady said:
because there is none.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a second battery soldered in the Universal,
but it is probably only for the RTC.

In WM2003 and earlier devices, as in PalmOS, the "Storage" for users is actually a part of the device RAM, which means that if it loses power you lose the contents, where the other part of the ram was used as execution memory (ie, like the ram in your desktop pc). In WM5 (and presumably later) this is the other way around, all Storage is in the device's (flash) ROM, and the RAM is *only* used as execution memory. This is why WM5 devices like Uni tend to have 128 megs of rom and 64 megs of ram whereas earlier devices tended to 64 megs of rom and 128 of ram. So basically you're not losing any more data by running out of juice than you would if the power failed on your desktop PC: If a particular piece of software is careless you might lose what's currently opened and unsaved, but everything else is persistent.

ameo running slow

as others, after installing lots of softwares on my ameo, it's running extremely slow nowadays.
I already reduce to keep those software I do require.
can anyone recommend any solution. thx.
I knew this is a general question and try to search in the forum. unfortunately it comes up lots of irrelevant result. :-(

If you're still on wm5, the first thing you should do to improve stability and speed is to upgrade to wm6. For me there was a world of difference.
If you have already upgraded and still find it slow, then one of the things you should rule out is whether or not it is caused by problem in reading and writing to the card or microdrive. Do a few rounds of performance test using Sktools a and are if they are normal still. If there are lost chains or cluster,repair them using pocket mechanics professional. Alternatively,copy the content to pc using wm5torage, reformat the card/drive,and copy them back from pc to card/drive. Redo the sktools performance test to ensure speed has improved. The last time when I had your problem ( soon after my wm6 upgrade), I did this and performance has been very good since then. Oh, I forgot to mention that one of the reasons I experienced sluggishness was due to incorrect formatting parameter for my card. When I format them correctly, speed improved dramatically.
If your MD is very fragmented,you could do what I recommended rather waiting hours and hours for defragmentation to finish.
I also try to install frequently used program in device memory,and seldom used one or very large program such as dictionary on microdrive. I have close about 50 third party software so the device memory isn't enough to hold them all. I find that speed also suffer of i'm low in device memory. So, don't waste it on things you seldom use.
Let's do that and see if speed improves.

thanks for your helpful tips. Eaglesteve. I will follow your hint to speed up my ameo. I am on WM6 arleady. probably as u point out, sw installed on MD is slowing down the device.
Forget to mention that, my device is always running at high cpu load. >90%.

Running at 90% could be a real clue. Have you installed any programs to improve your bluetooth performance?

whatabout device storage memory remaining? If it is critically low it will also prevent program from starting and making them slow. If so, check the size of internet temporary file in windows directory. If needed, go to delete them. I just did for mine and freed up over 50mb of device storage memory!

nrm said:
Running at 90% could be a real clue. Have you installed any programs to improve your bluetooth performance?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, I am using BTIO

Free memory s/w for HD

Hello,
Being used HD for one week, I found one problem about memory consumption (not a problem actually ).
At startup, about 120M free memory, after using for one day (Opera, view picture, games, stock manager, etc), only about 80M RAM left.
I have tried to use
- oxios memory
- MemMaid 2.0
but it can only free 1-2M RAM, where is my RAM

Yes, I found out the same problem! Try to do a reset and the memory is cleaned again. I use the X button to kill all programs after using them, but it seems to be fludding on a regular basis, also activesync program keep popping up when I'm not connected, and the memory usage slowely gets higher every hour with a few procent.
Does anyone else has the same prob? Didn't use special appz yet, because it doesn't seem to disturb working with device.
greetz,
swa

Swantony001 said:
Yes, I found out the same problem! Try to do a reset and the memory is cleaned again. I use the X button to kill all programs after using them, but it seems to be fludding on a regular basis, also activesync program keep popping up when I'm not connected, and the memory usage slowely gets higher every hour with a few procent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until the phone starts having problems, why worry? With every new device there are threads like this with people obsessing over the amount of free RAM their devices show, but honestly you can just leave Windows Mobile to deal with the RAM itself and you'll never have a problem. There's no need to try and recover all the RAM that you think should be free. The OS will take care of it.

I have the same problem. My guess is it a memory leak in some apps. ITs no big deal, because there is lots of free memory and if it really bugs me, I can do a soft reset every now and then.

Yes, it is not a problem to me until now as there are plenty of RAM available!
I just curious about the kinds of program that consume the memory??
From my observation, WM OS is not doing the job of memory management well.
SiliconS said:
Until the phone starts having problems, why worry? With every new device there are threads like this with people obsessing over the amount of free RAM their devices show, but honestly you can just leave Windows Mobile to deal with the RAM itself and you'll never have a problem. There's no need to try and recover all the RAM that you think should be free. The OS will take care of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Clearing your browser cache will retrieve some of it
(unless you have it to cache to the storage card)

I don't bother too much with this as it does not seem to become a problem.
But, I don't "load and leave" applications. I also generally do a soft reset once a week.
However, in SK Tools there is a "FreeUP RAM" application as part of the suite. I just ran it and it recovered 2 mbytes (a bit less than 1 %)

@ Swantony001 :
Hi, there is a thead about stopping Active-Sync activating itself all the time.
Works perfectly for me.
See here :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=463013&highlight=active
Greetings,
go42

the memory leak does cause problems for me, well with tomtom7 it does. sometimes i get the message "not enough memory" unpon booting TT and am forced to do a soft reset.
its not often, but the fact it happens piddles me off!

Hi, guys!
I've noticed the same thing! Something consumes active memory!!!
I watched some processes... So "cprog.exe" and "device.exe" eat memory from time to time.
I use Soft Reset once a day or in two days.
If anyone gets a new WWE ROM with that bug being fixed, please, let me know .
Memory consumption is not a big problem now, but it's a bit annoying...

jonajuna said:
the memory leak does cause problems for me, well with tomtom7 it does. sometimes i get the message "not enough memory" unpon booting TT and am forced to do a soft reset.
its not often, but the fact it happens piddles me off!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn never experienced this problem before *touches wood*
Yeah i have experience the memory leaking up starting from 38% to 44% in a matter of hours.
No biggie, but if it comes down to problems like jonajuna experienced then, yes that is a problem.

ReadyBoost.. Worth using?

Finally decided to buy a new laptop to replace my old one. It came with Windows 8 (x64) pre-installed and 8GB DDR3 physical RAM.
My question is: Is it worth using ReadyBoost on the system?
Currently it only has a standard 5400rpm HDD, and an SSD isn't an option for the time being. I have a 16GB Class 10 UHS1 MicroSD card which I had dedicated to ReadyBoost, but after some digging, it seems like ReadyBoost is pretty much useless if the system has more than 1GB of physical RAM.
Sent from my GT-N7105

ReadyBoost is potentially useful with any amount of RAM, but the point at which it becomes useful varies depending on usage. If you only ever run one 2MB install footprint / 5MB working set program on Windows, 1GB of RAM is plenty and ReadyBoost won't help you; SuperFetch will happily cache that program in the handful of spare RAM that the system already has. If you run a ton of background processes that use up 6GB of RAM at all times, and then periodically want to run a program that has a 10GB install footprint, then 16GB of ReadyBoost (which is just SuperFetch cache) will dramatically improve the load times for that program.

Thanks for that. I've had my lappy for more than a month now and my RAM usage rarely goes above 20% (and never goes above 24%) so I don't think RB is necessary for me.
I also read on somewhere that ReadyBoost can wear out a device through constantly writing to it. Is that true? Can ReadyBoost do more harm than good?
Sent from my GT-N7105

I dont use RB, nor superfetch either..truth is i disable all but bare essentials.
Ive also heard that rumor, about excessive wear. Im sure there is some truth to that. Usage causes wear. Just how much wear I have no idea. Im sure it dont help mechanical drives...ssd's prolly dont bother them. *shrugs*
Best practice I have found is just to keep your system maintained, and clean of bloat/malware.
With todays hardware, gains im sure are marginal at best. Seriously you cant wait n extra second for that app to load?
Sent from my LG-E730 using xda app-developers app

@KCA.: In your case, I don't think you would benefit much from ReadyBoost, no. You can always add it later if you want, though. I mostly find it useful with games that have very large install footprints, as Flash memory reading is typically much faster than magnetic hard disk reading. However, reading from RAM is much faster still, and if you're only actively using up to about 2GB of your RAM, that means the other 6GB is already being used for a SuperFetch cache.
@13lack13ox: Your system, your choice of how to use it... but unless you're already seriously stressing out the capabilities of you hardware, caching (which is all that SuperFetch and ReadyBoost are) can significantly improve performance. On an old machine I had with 1280MB of RAM, loading Eve Online (which at the time had about a 2GB install footprint) took almost twenty seconds on Windows XP and only about six seconds on Vista (with a 2GB SD card being used for ReadyBoost) even though the system was massively above the XP minimum specifications and only slightly above the Vista ones. It's a much bigger difference than a mere extra second.
As for wear, it's true that RB will shorten the life of Flash storage. NAND Flash memory (the type used in all flashdrives, SD cards, SSDs, and so forth) has a limited number of write operations for a given block of storage, and ReadyBoost will probably write to your SD card much more often than it would be written to if it just sat in your camera or similar. However, the write limits for modern Flash storage are typically in the tens or hundreds of thousands of times, and the storage controllers use a technique called "wear leveling" to ensure that no portion of the storage gets burned out early. The SD card will almost certainly become obsolete due to size and speed well before ReadyBoost would wear it out, so if you want to use it for that purpose, go ahead.

13lack13ox said:
Best practice I have found is just to keep your system maintained, and clean of bloat/malware.
With todays hardware, gains im sure are marginal at best. Seriously you cant wait n extra second for that app to load?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol can't argue with that.
GoodDayToDie said:
@KCA.: In your case, I don't think you would benefit much from ReadyBoost, no. You can always add it later if you want, though. I mostly find it useful with games that have very large install footprints, as Flash memory reading is typically much faster than magnetic hard disk reading. However, reading from RAM is much faster still, and if you're only actively using up to about 2GB of your RAM, that means the other 6GB is already being used for a SuperFetch cache.
As for wear, it's true that RB will shorten the life of Flash storage. NAND Flash memory (the type used in all flashdrives, SD cards, SSDs, and so forth) has a limited number of write operations for a given block of storage, and ReadyBoost will probably write to your SD card much more often than it would be written to if it just sat in your camera or similar. However, the write limits for modern Flash storage are typically in the tens or hundreds of thousands of times, and the storage controllers use a technique called "wear leveling" to ensure that no portion of the storage gets burned out early. The SD card will almost certainly become obsolete due to size and speed well before ReadyBoost would wear it out, so if you want to use it for that purpose, go ahead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info. I'll just leave it. Seems like the benefits are negligible.. A waste of a port

KCA. said:
Finally decided to buy a new laptop to replace my old one. It came with Windows 8 (x64) pre-installed and 8GB DDR3 physical RAM.
My question is: Is it worth using ReadyBoost on the system?
Currently it only has a standard 5400rpm HDD, and an SSD isn't an option for the time being. I have a 16GB Class 10 UHS1 MicroSD card which I had dedicated to ReadyBoost, but after some digging, it seems like ReadyBoost is pretty much useless if the system has more than 1GB of physical RAM.
Sent from my GT-N7105
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Readyboost uses high speed USB drives to swap kernel memory. If you have an SSD, there is no point. If you are using a conventional HDD, the readyboost will improve performance (that is why they made it). I use it on all my Windows 7 machines except my ultraportable, which has an SSD. With USB drives so cheap, why not? Of course, you need to make sure the USB drive supports ReadyBoost; not all of them have good enough performance.

Unless MS changed this since Vista, ReadyBoost does *NOT* swap kernel memory. ReadyBoost had a specific requirement that removing the device while it was in use shouldn't disrupt the system (even so far as crashing a program). Removing paged-out kernel memory would very quickly cause a BSOD. If you have any additional info, please do share it; I'm curious.
Now, it's possible that RB will act as a read cache (not a write cache, because any changes must be written down to disk) for the pagefile. In that case, it may still improve performance. However, what I read about it initially said it was simply additional SuperFetch cache (SF typically uses unallocated RAM to pre-load files that it expects you to need soon, based on past usage patterns, so that they are available instantly without waiting on disk access). For machine with limited RAM (or which load very large programs or files), SF can dramatically improve load times. RB storage, while not as fast as RAM, is still faster than disk access.
In any case, if you have gobs of RAM, ReadyBoost doesn't matter. The kernel won't be paging stuff out, so no need for a kernel swap cache. The pagefile won't be getting much use at all, in fact (some writes to "clean" changes in memory so it can be swapped out fast, but very few reads). Unless the files you access are large than your free RAM, they shouldn't slow anything down either.

GoodDayToDie said:
Unless MS changed this since Vista, ReadyBoost does *NOT* swap kernel memory. ReadyBoost had a specific requirement that removing the device while it was in use shouldn't disrupt the system (even so far as crashing a program). Removing paged-out kernel memory would very quickly cause a BSOD. If you have any additional info, please do share it; I'm curious.
Now, it's possible that RB will act as a read cache (not a write cache, because any changes must be written down to disk) for the pagefile. In that case, it may still improve performance. However, what I read about it initially said it was simply additional SuperFetch cache (SF typically uses unallocated RAM to pre-load files that it expects you to need soon, based on past usage patterns, so that they are available instantly without waiting on disk access). For machine with limited RAM (or which load very large programs or files), SF can dramatically improve load times. RB storage, while not as fast as RAM, is still faster than disk access.
In any case, if you have gobs of RAM, ReadyBoost doesn't matter. The kernel won't be paging stuff out, so no need for a kernel swap cache. The pagefile won't be getting much use at all, in fact (some writes to "clean" changes in memory so it can be swapped out fast, but very few reads). Unless the files you access are large than your free RAM, they shouldn't slow anything down either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, I should not have mentioned kernel. I found a short article that indicates it swaps out pieces of the software that would otherwise be swapped to the slower HDD. It will not crash because when it writes to the readyboost, it also writes to HDD - but it can read the readboost much faster than the HDD, so it increases performance when it has to pick up that data again. And the article mentions that more memory is better than readyboost (but I still use it on my Windows 7 machine with lots of memory).
Earlier explanations did not mention the pagefile, although that seems to be to be the better name for what is swapped. But I'm not sure about that. The early web postings indicated that it wrote parts of the Windows system that were frequently accessed.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tomarcher/archive/2006/06/02/615199.aspx?Redirected=true
EDIT: From the Q&A it sounds like it is indeed the pagefile.

Cool, thanks for the link! Sounds like it does indeed act as a read cache. Very cool.
Still probably not a *big* boost on a machine with lots of RAM, but I expect it'll help anyhow.

Constant Low Memory [N][all roms]

Hey xda-ers,
I have been plagued by this issue for quite some time and wanted to see if it was just me, or if others share my pain.
Since migrating to Nougat I have found that my phone starts to slow down and freeze after some usage. Typically after leaving some apps open.
The problem immediately goes away once i hit Clear All on the recents, thus I think it is a RAM issue.
In all kernerls or Roms I have tried the problem persists, even if selecting "Aggressive mode" for low memory killer.
I always thought that leaving apps open will not impact ram, as android "understands" theses are not being used (hence why all "ram managers" are just snake oil).
So is anyone else getting this slow down after a few hours of use?
Any tips/tricks to help with this?
TL;DR: how do i fix constant low memory on Nougat roms?

It must be a particular app/set of apps that would be causing this. I see from your signature that you are on Nitrogen OS, as am I. In my particular case, I have never seen more than 1.2GB RAM of the 1.8GB used, the usual average is more in the mid to high 800 Meg range. You could check for yourself in settings, under memory, the current usage is shown. There is a further sub menu in there that shows per app memory used. Check and see if you can identify the culprit.
P.S: I do use Greenify, maybe that keeps the RAM usage low? Maybe someone else can chime in with their usage as well.

Karan.S said:
It must be a particular app/set of apps that would be causing this. I see from your signature that you are on Nitrogen OS, as am I. In my particular case, I have never seen more than 1.2GB RAM of the 1.8GB used, the usual average is more in the mid to high 800 Meg range. You could check for yourself in settings, under memory, the current usage is shown. There is a further sub menu in there that shows per app memory used. Check and see if you can identify the culprit.
P.S: I do use Greenify, maybe that keeps the RAM usage low? Maybe someone else can chime in with their usage as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, thanks for the reply.
I also use Greenify, and when checking the app usage (which i have monitored for a few months), I see that OS uses around 1.2, and chrome and other apps around 100-200mb each.
However, it seems that the moment I have less than 400mb "free" it starts to glitch.
Also, issue persists even with Tesla Rom (which is what i moved to a few months ago).
Maybe this is just the limit of the N4 with newer apps...

For me the android OS is currently around the 350MB mark. Tap on Android OS and see what is using the memory. Maybe the cache is running high for you?