Database Users

HTC "video driver" bug causing issues for many users?

Anyone know what this about?
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/...-angry-mobile-owners-rush-castle-htc-with-bu/
link to the xda thread about it?

This is about a group of litigation-crazed people who want to file a class-action suit against a device manufacturer (HTC) because the manufacturer did not include a functionality that would be technologically possible to include in a device. Since class-action suits are overwhelmingly just scams where the lawyers literally make millions for a few hours work, and the companies sued get to give you a coupon for a future purchase thereby increasing the chance you will, in fact, make a future purchase from them, I make no prediction as to whether a suit will be filed or settled in the customary way. However, in a "real" law suit, there is no way the courts would require a company to include all technologically possible features in a product, regardless of how "easy" it might allegedly be to include them. Note that in this case, neither HTC nor the carriers (as far as I have heard) ever stated that this functionality was included in the device.

Yeah, I don't know where that is coming from... of all the issues with the phone.. video is the least. BT still sucks as well as the phone turning on and off at will. Not checking email when it is supposed to... etc etc.

yakky said:
Yeah, I don't know where that is coming from... of all the issues with the phone.. video is the least. BT still sucks as well as the phone turning on and off at will. Not checking email when it is supposed to... etc etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you should file a class-action suit against the video driver class-action people for taking HTC's time and attention away from fixing real problems...

Actually the mogul does have video playback issues with constant stutering and pausing. From what I've heard from 6700 users video playback is much much smoother (the way it should be). I don't know if it calls for a law suit but hey at least they got htc's attention and now their releasing new drivers that will supposedly fix the video playback issues.

bakntyme said:
This is about a group of litigation-crazed people who want to file a class-action suit against a device manufacturer (HTC) because the manufacturer did not include a functionality that would be technologically possible to include in a device. Since class-action suits are overwhelmingly just scams where the lawyers literally make millions for a few hours work, and the companies sued get to give you a coupon for a future purchase thereby increasing the chance you will, in fact, make a future purchase from them, I make no prediction as to whether a suit will be filed or settled in the customary way. However, in a "real" law suit, there is no way the courts would require a company to include all technologically possible features in a product, regardless of how "easy" it might allegedly be to include them. Note that in this case, neither HTC nor the carriers (as far as I have heard) ever stated that this functionality was included in the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep your feces to yourself. if you have nothing better to do but flame a valid issue on HTC phones then i suggest to go jump off a hill.

SINNN said:
Keep your feces to yourself. if you have nothing better to do but flame a valid issue on HTC phones then i suggest to go jump off a hill.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you afraid for someone to post a valid, opposing viewpoint to yours? Can you not accept that someone who disagrees with you may still have a valid point? My post was not flaming at all, your post however seems to utilize nothing but flame to express your thoughts. Now, please post again with a well-thought-out response to my points as opposed to a simple flame, as I am interested in an intelligent response and will read it with an open mind.
While you are at it, maybe you can explain why, if all that is needed is a simple driver and all graphics problems will be solved with no detrimental side-effects, no one here on xda-developers, where I truly believe there is at least as much talent as at HTC, has done the allegedly simple task of writing or finding that driver and distributing it.

bakntyme said:
Why are you afraid for someone to post a valid, opposing viewpoint to yours? Can you not accept that someone who disagrees with you may still have a valid point? My post was not flaming at all, your post however seems to utilize nothing but flame to express your thoughts. Now, please post again with a well-thought-out response to my points as opposed to a simple flame, as I am interested in an intelligent response and will read it with an open mind.
While you are at it, maybe you can explain why, if all that is needed is a simple driver and all graphics problems will be solved with no detrimental side-effects, no one here on xda-developers, where I truly believe there is at least as much talent as at HTC, has done the allegedly simple task of writing or finding that driver and distributing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel the need to address this... despite not having been in the original exchange. I can accept that you have a differing viewpoint from us. I refuse to be called a "litigation-crazed" person. I also think you need to get your facts straight before you pass judgment.
The simple fact is - we want the functionality that our devices were advertised with. Many of us did our research and realized that the MSM7500 is a POWERFUL chip. The video acceleration is top-tier, and everything else seemed good too. Then HTC decided to not include a driver for video acceleration. Also, before someone mentions that HTC has claimed(but never in an official press release) that the MSM7500 might NOT include the video acceleration... When have you known a huge manufacturer(nVidia, AMD, Intel, ATi, Qualcomm, etc) to name two differing devices the same name? They don't. they generally qualify them(e.g. 8800 series nVidia cards can be 8800 GT, GTX, GTS, etc.) What HTC did is akin to Dell selling you an Inspiron notebook with an nVidia 8800GTS card inside, then telling you that they didn't include drivers. Oh, and don't forget that nVidia won't support the card, since it's up to the manufacturer(Dell) to supply the drivers. Microsoft won't do it since it's Dell's problem. Dell won't do it because it isn't cost effective. (Suspend the reality of the situation for the analogy, though, please) Now you're left with a $300 piece of video hardware that can't be used because nobody wanted to provide a driver. Go software acceleration! That's the issue we're having. The phones WERE advertised as having the MSM7500(or 7200) which according to everything I've seen both have video acceleration. HTC just dropped the ball.
Now, about us writing our own drivers... That would be difficult without getting a bunch of information from Microsoft, HTC and Qualcomm, which they won't release. If you don't know why, look up open source video drivers for Linux, and you'll understand the pain. It's not a baseless suit - however I don't think that class action is the way to go. I think we need to work WITH MS, HTC, and Qualcomm to come up with a driver. Period. Don't let up the pressure until we have that.

I am sorry, but when your advocacy group starts out with a name like "HTCClassAction", and names its website "htcclassaction.org", it shows itself as not interested in getting the claimed result, but instead, despite any protestations from the group, interested in filing a class-action lawsuit from the beginning. That is "litigation-crazed". Was "htcvideodrivers.org" not available? I am sure that, if you wanted to, given a few minutes you could come up with several non-litigation-oriented group and website names. If you were the product manager for the 6800 at HTC, and you heard of the issues raised by the group HTCClassAction, would you think, "Here is a group of users that wants to work with us to resolve what they see as a legitimate issue?"
Speaking of facts...have you actually seen an advertisement that stated that the devices came with this functionality, or did you just assume that because it was advertised as having this chipset, and the chipset has this capability, that the functionality would be included? I would bet that HTC never stated that the 6800 would include every feature technologically possible with the chipset. It has the capability of supporting an 8MP camera, but they didn't include that either. Another lawsuit? I am sure there are other things the chipset would be CAPABLE of that were not included. If you actually researched the chipset so thoroughly for this issue prior to purchasing the device, why did you not notice in the first 30 days that it was not included, and return the device?
Realize that modern class-action lawsuits are almost always settled for lots of money to the attorneys and a pittance to the class. Remember the Verizon Moto 710 Bluetooth class action? It was settled as usual...the attorneys got somewhere around $6 million; users got $25 if they wanted to keep the 710 and stay with Verizon, a waived ETF and a refund if they wanted to leave Verizon, and a credit toward another device if they wanted to stay with Verizon but not keep the 710. They did not get additional Bluetooth profiles. And if this goes to trial, the courts will never order a manufacturer to provide technology, and support for it, that the manufacturer does not want to provide. IF you could prove false advertising, and I do not think that you could, you might get a small refund or credit toward another phone. If that is what you want, just sell the device on an internet auction site and buy something else...you will probably get more that way.

sucks too that our phones dont even have the ati chip in them. my htc wizard (old school) had better video and gameplay

I don't play games much on my ppc so this problem hasn't affected me as much. However I did notice that PIE was sluggish and freaked when video playback sucked on WM and TCPMP. Most of that was avoided by using GDI on TCPMP.
The real issue here is why can't they add the driver? If it was a simple fix it probably wouldn't have been left out in the first place. Sounds to me like they ran into technical issues trying to make it work.

I just got the mogul last week. I have 30 days to evaluate it. Do you think that I should have gotten something else? I think that I've had at least 10 different Smartphones & PPC's in the past 5 or 6 years. They all have something I dislike about them. This one is the best one I've had yet, but would you recommend something else? THANKS

johnannie said:
I just got the mogul last week. I have 30 days to evaluate it. Do you think that I should have gotten something else? I think that I've had at least 10 different Smartphones & PPC's in the past 5 or 6 years. They all have something I dislike about them. This one is the best one I've had yet, but would you recommend something else? THANKS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you hit the nail on the head. EVERY PPC is going to have SOMETHING you dont like about it.
with that said. it only matters what you think. dont go taking advice from a forum where 50 percent of its members cant even tie their shoes.
For the record, i agree with what the person said way up at the beginnning of the thread. "Why are you *****ing now when you had 30 days in which to evaluate and return it if you felt the need?!""
I would imagine the courts will say the same. everyone who thinks this is a legit complaint needs to get a hobby. you all had 30 days in which to make your decision, so DEAL with it.
sound like a buncha kids to me
I guess we should sue them for not having a 'tv out' jack on the mogul too, since thats also possible. and oh yeah, where's my 8 megapixel camera on the mogul?? it supports that as well.
ah screw it, im going to cry to mommy

watson540 said:
you hit the nail on the head. EVERY PPC is going to have SOMETHING you dont like about it.
with that said. it only matters what you think. dont go taking advice from a forum where 50 percent of its members cant even tie their shoes.
For the record, i agree with what the person said way up at the beginnning of the thread. "Why are you *****ing now when you had 30 days in which to evaluate and return it if you felt the need?!""
I would imagine the courts will say the same. everyone who thinks this is a legit complaint needs to get a hobby. you all had 30 days in which to make your decision, so DEAL with it.
sound like a buncha kids to me
I guess we should sue them for not having a 'tv out' jack on the mogul too, since thats also possible. and oh yeah, where's my 8 megapixel camera on the mogul?? it supports that as well.
ah screw it, im going to cry to mommy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahahahaha. Yes, we're children. Little babies, the lot of us. Anyway......
No, we shouldn't sue them for not including a tv-out jack or an 8 megapixel camera. What we are trying to achieve is driver support FOR THE INCLUDED HARDWARE. This is what most people who argue against our position fail to realize. We aren't asking them to do something crazy, like give us a better camera or a tv-out jack, or even more memory. We're asking them to SUPPORT THE HARDWARE THEY SOLD US. Gasp.
Now... I'll use an analogy for those among us who are a bit retarded. If you were to buy a car that was advertised with a special computer chip in it that can control a supercharger, the electronic stability control system, up to 6 airbags, and the radio (all of which are included in your car, albeit only 4 airbags) - and it came with a 30-day money-back guarantee... and you drove it for 30 days and thought to yourself, "Wow, this is clearly better than last years' model" - would you return it? Probably not... That's what happened here.
We bought our phones, tried them and went, "Wow, they kicked the crap out of the <insert old PDA phone here>" and kept them. Now, back to our example. Now imagine you go to a car-meet-up with your new fancy car, and everyone there is talking about how <insert another fast car here> is wayyyy faster than their car, in the same conditions. You and the other owners do some research and find out that the car manufacturer didn't include software to make your supercharger work. It's just inert, sitting there looking pretty. Wouldn't you be pretty pissed that the chip in your car wasn't actually using the supercharger? Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger, that the supercharger would actually work?
Anyway - that's where I'm coming from at least - I don't presume to speak for anyone else though. I will say this though, watson540, you need to calm down. You're running around these forums beating on people's opinions and posts. Frankly, yours aren't much more productive. At least try to post something relevant or meaningful... or at the very least something other than "you moron, rtft" or "you moron, stop crying".

it's not really a bug its more
like a pc with the generic vga driver installed
even if the pc have a geforce
problems is that one cant get hold of the
spc driver to replace the generic

ponicg said:
We bought our phones, tried them and went, "Wow, they kicked the crap out of the <insert old PDA phone here>" and kept them.
...
Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger, that the supercharger would actually work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, so you admit that you were very satisfied with the performance until someone said "Hey, I think they OWE US something MORE than what we got, let's SUE THEM for it?" If the device met your needs when you tested it, then you have no complaint. If it did not, you should have returned it in the 30 day return period.
As I asked you way back in this thread, but you have not yet addressed, (nor any of the other points in my previous post), "have you actually seen an advertisement that stated that the devices came with this functionality, or did you just assume that because it was advertised as having this chipset, and the chipset has this capability, that the functionality would be included?...If you actually researched the chipset so thoroughly for this issue prior to purchasing the device, why did you not notice in the first 30 days that it was not included, and return the device?"
None of these analogies is perfect...one big flaw in yours is that you hypothesized "If you were to buy a car that was advertised with a special computer chip in it that can control a supercharger," then switched to the car actually having a supercharger advertised: "Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger". Another is that the supercharger's existence is open and apparent to someone who looks under the hood, without requiring any research or disassembly of the vehicle. Another is that in chip manufacturing, it is usually more efficient to produce a batch of chips with all the capabilities, then use the ones you want in each device, as opposed to redesigning the chip package and retooling the production run for each combination of features desired in each application. No one could reasonably say that it was more efficient to produce a factory run of cars with all possible mechanical features (such as the supercharger in your example) included, and then only connect and use the ones desired for that model. However, auto manufacturers also sometimes utilize parts and sub-assemblies in a particular model without enabling or utilizing all of that component's capabilities, when doing so is more efficient.
Since you like automotive analogies, I will use one without resorting to calling anyone "a bit retarded": suppose that Ford announced that all 2010 Mustangs would use the new computer chip from Super Tuner Corporation, "because of its wonderful and powerful new capabilities," with no details as to what particular features would be made available. Your research into the chip on Super Tuner's website revealed that it supported superchargers, turbochargers, four-wheel drive, four-wheel steering, and nitrous fuel systems. You went in to a Ford dealer and test-drove the top-of-the-line 2010 Mustang, were impressed by its performance, and bought it. Six months later, someone pointed out that you had received none of those performance items listed above. You did not know why, but it was because Ford had internally determined pre-production that the suspension and frame would not be sufficient to provide those performance items in any model Mustang, and they did not want to re-engineer the support structure. They made no announcement about these features not being available, as they had never made any announcement about including those features. Would you join the MustangClassAction.org group? Now suppose that you had done no research prior to the purchase, and six months later discovered the information on Super Tuner's website after someone pointed out the lack to you...even less valid a complaint then, isn't it?
And further suppose that at the same time, someone else says, "I took the interior of my Mustang apart, and it has mounts for 8 speakers, and they only provided it with 4 speakers. Ford has to install 4 more speakers in every Mustang, because it has the capability of holding them!"
And another owner pulls out his factory radio, notices the output jack on the back for a subwoofer..."Where is my subwoofer? It obviously was supposed to come with my car, or they would not have included a radio that could support one and put a jack on the back of the radio to plug one in!!"
Meanwhile, another owner says "I was testing the electronic trip computer included in my Mustang, the same one included in all 2010 Mustangs, and it has the ability to calculate and display up to 55 MPG, but my Mustang only gets 23 MPG. Obviously, Ford was advertising a Mustang that would get 55 MPG and must give us that!"
Enough analogies? Would you get angrier, and call Ford arrogant, when they say, "Thank you for your business, customers, but we never said the Mustang had those capabilities, and we have no intention of retrofitting them, but we will take your opinions into account in designing our next vehicle?"
Analogies by their nature will never replicate the Titan/Mogul/6800 situation. However, we can discuss the 6800 situation itself, and I am waiting for your answer about the HTC advertisement and your not discovering the lack in the first 30 days of your device ownership.

its just bull**** when the the video playback on the 6700 is alot better than the titan. makes no sense at all and yes i feel ripped off.

im no expert..but from over here it looks like bakntyme just put all of you crybabies in your place
very well said bakntyme. perfect.
p.s. yeah im an asshole. but this asshole can read and troubleshoot and operate electronics all by my big self.
read these forums enough and you will start to think everyone in the world collectively never got out of elementary school
apologies where they are due. but some people are incredible helpless (this last comment has nothing to do with this thread im responding to the guy above who "called me out" for being an (admitted) asshole)

unless you guys can come up with some previous claim by HTC that the mogul was supposed to support this specific capability of the chip, i dont see how you guys can try to force anything out of them. I'm with bakntyme on this one.
Sure its pretty crappy that they put the hardware in there and didnt support it, and im no lawyer, but it doesnt seem like they would be under any legal obligation to support the video drivers.

watson540 said:
im no expert..but from over here it looks like bakntyme just put all of you crybabies in your place
very well said bakntyme. perfect.
p.s. yeah im an asshole. but this asshole can read and troubleshoot and operate electronics all by my big self.
read these forums enough and you will start to think everyone in the world collectively never got out of elementary school
apologies where they are due. but some people are incredible helpless (this last comment has nothing to do with this thread im responding to the guy above who "called me out" for being an (admitted) asshole)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although I appreciate the support, a more professional wording of it might help to keep from increasing the level of emotions and inflammation on this issue.

Who Should Root their Phones?

I guess this is kind of a question for the XDA community at large, since you are considered the "rooting gods" by us mere mortals. That being said... I've had enough experience over the years and I've rooted both WinMo and Android phones, including my Hero (running ic3 right now). What bothers me is the push by some people (on other forums, like the Sprint fan page on Facebook) for anyone and everyone to root their phone because "it's like jailbreaking an iPhone" (which is nonsense, since most people jailbreak iPhones to install apps that Apple refuses to put in the App Store) or "because the carriers don't want you to have access to all your phone's features" (more nonsense). Anyone technical enough knows that rooting is like giving someone permanent root access on a Linux or UNIX system, with the risk of doing serious damage if you don't know what you're doing. So, looking for an opinion here, is it wise for "Joe (or Jill) Average User" to attempt to root their phone?
And, as a second question, once rooted, it's always been my assumption that warranties are voided, you lose Total Equipment Protection, etc., but some (supposedly smart and informed people) say that they are not. Opinions again, please?

mjb5406 said:
I guess this is kind of a question for the XDA community at large, since you are considered the "rooting gods" by us mere mortals. That being said... I've had enough experience over the years and I've rooted both WinMo and Android phones, including my Hero (running ic3 right now). What bothers me is the push by some people (on other forums, like the Sprint fan page on Facebook) for anyone and everyone to root their phone because "it's like jailbreaking an iPhone" (which is nonsense, since most people jailbreak iPhones to install apps that Apple refuses to put in the App Store) or "because the carriers don't want you to have access to all your phone's features" (more nonsense). Anyone technical enough knows that rooting is like giving someone permanent root access on a Linux or UNIX system, with the risk of doing serious damage if you don't know what you're doing. So, looking for an opinion here, is it wise for "Joe (or Jill) Average User" to attempt to root their phone?
And, as a second question, once rooted, it's always been my assumption that warranties are voided, you lose Total Equipment Protection, etc., but some (supposedly smart and informed people) say that they are not. Opinions again, please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think only people who are comfortable rooting should root.
The warranty is null and void if you root the phone.

mjb5406 said:
So, looking for an opinion here, is it wise for "Joe (or Jill) Average User" to attempt to root their phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it wise? That depends on the user deciding if he/she should root. Should they be given the same opportunity as someone that's more tech savvy than the average user? Sure, why not. Android encourages users to fully customize there devices, if that means getting one's hand dirty to get the most of your phone, then give it go. However, if the end user is afraid about "bricking" or "voiding" there warranty; then it's probably best they stick with the factory defaults.
At the end of the day; it's the user's choice. Rooting of course allows one to get the maximum potential out of the phone, non-rooting allows for a decent experience. However, it's quite obvious that once someone see's the many wonderful things that comes with rooting; they too are often enticed and decide to take the plunge. Which, ultimately is a good thing; they're able to join a community like XDA, learn new things about there device and about computers/hacking that they thought they never could, and of course, they now get to enjoy the benefits of rooting.
mjb5406 said:
And, as a second question, once rooted, it's always been my assumption that warranties are voided, you lose Total Equipment Protection, etc., but some (supposedly smart and informed people) say that they are not. Opinions again, please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing is, even Sprint employees root there phones, so at the end of the day, its comes down to the sales/tech person at your local Sprint store. People on here have said that if your phone is broken and you take it in to get it serviced without flashing the Sprint RUU that Sprint will say you've voided your warranty because they can't work with the "modified" phone (e.g. rooted, etc).
However, this is relative from person to person and from store to store. Like I said, pending on the Sprint rep/tech -- they can choose to service your "modified" phone or tell you that you've voided your warranty and that they won't help you. Of course; to remedy this, you just need to go home; flash the latest Sprint RUU and go back to the store -- then they can't complain.
So, if you're worried about voiding your warrenty or that Sprint will freak out, flash the latest RUU before going into your local Sprint store... if you have a good rapport with your Sprint reps/techs, it shouldn't matter if you're phones rooted or not though.

You cannot compare the iphone to the android on a operating system level because android is free under the GPL and by "rooting" the operating system only means that you enabled an option that was otherwise disabled by the source for the end users protection, not because its in any violation of laws like the Iphone.
Rooting the device only opens opportunities for more options on a less limited field rather than being on a more limited field with little options. The iphone is basically like a "Nascar Vehichle" its tagged and ridiculed with many logos and flare, It's commercialized in such a way that not only does jail braking and unlocking violate the companies terms of use but other companies that own the hardware inside the device. My speculation on the sprint fan club is this...
There are three people in the tech field. People who use their equipment,p eople who play with it and people who do both. I do both.. which one are you?

Powers16 said:
You cannot compare the iphone to the android on a operating system level because android is free under the GPL and by "rooting" the operating system only means that you enabled an option that was otherwise disabled by the source for the end users protection, not because its in any violation of laws like the Iphone.
Rooting the device only opens opportunities for more options on a less limited field rather than being on a more limited field with little options. The iphone is basically like a "Nascar Vehichle" its tagged and ridiculed with many logos and flare, It's commercialized in such a way that not only does jail braking and unlocking violate the companies terms of use but other companies that own the hardware inside the device. My speculation on the sprint fan club is this...
There are three people in the tech field. People who use their equipment,p eople who play with it and people who do both. I do both.. which one are you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No question... I do both. But, then again, I've been doing this for years. My issue is that it seems like there are two groups of "rooters": Those that do it and understand what they are doing and the risks that are involved and those that do it, tell other people to do it, and really don't understand the ramifications other than to say it's "cool". There has even been a request for someone to post rooting FAQ on the official Sprint page on Facebook (which is very stupid) and lots of talk about people want to root because they want "free tethering" (also very stupid); to talk about this on a Sprint-monitored forum is not a good idea, IMHO, and to tell people to root their phones when all they get is "What's rooting?" as a reply tells me that those people should probably be content just using their phones and, if they run into problems, go to Sprint for assistance. It's usually easy to tell who has a more technical understanding of the phone just by the content of their posts.

mjb5406 said:
No question... I do both. But, then again, I've been doing this for years. My issue is that it seems like there are two groups of "rooters": Those that do it and understand what they are doing and the risks that are involved and those that do it, tell other people to do it, and really don't understand the ramifications other than to say it's "cool". There has even been a request for someone to post rooting FAQ on the official Sprint page on Facebook (which is very stupid) and lots of talk about people want to root because they want "free tethering" (also very stupid); to talk about this on a Sprint-monitored forum is not a good idea, IMHO, and to tell people to root their phones when all they get is "What's rooting?" as a reply tells me that those people should probably be content just using their phones and, if they run into problems, go to Sprint for assistance. It's usually easy to tell who has a more technical understanding of the phone just by the content of their posts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is completely true. There are a LOT of people on here who do things without reading or thinking. I think it was when the Hero dropped in price. Everyone bought it, they started googling it, they found XDA, and started posting left and right. I got my Hero the day it came out, but I didn't root it until January 2010. I was a little hesitant and scared, but I did it.... and I'm glad I did.

If you wipe user data on a stock TNT 1.0.1 device, you now get a EULA

Someone else mentioned this earlier, but I hadn't seen it until just now. EDIT: the original poster: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9374284&postcount=23
Well, a note to TnT management, if you happen to read this. I didn't click "Agree", so phooey on you.
Btw, it's things like this which made me decide to never accept donations. Once I start doing that, I'm crossing over somewhere that I really don't want to go - TnT / Viewsonic, please keep that in mind.
EDIT: To Viewsonic CS -- I had two devices (one was going to be a gift to a relative, and I was going to leave TnT on it). I now have one device, and the main reason is because of that insane EULA. Specifically, section 4.1 and, to a lesser extent, 4.2. You should have a chat with that company and have them explain what the heck they were thinking.
If a larger tablet company like Archos did this, Engadget and other tech sites would roast them alive.

roebeet said:
Someone else mentioned this earlier, but I hadn't seen it until just now.
Well, a note to TnT management, if you happen to read this. I didn't click "Agree", so phooey on you.
Btw, it's things like this which made me decide to never accept donations. Once I start doing that, I'm crossing over somewhere that I really don't want to go - TnT / Viewsonic, please keep that in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One reason I bought the sears warrenty for 60 bucks. So I am not to worried if Viewsonic is going to honor their warrenty

Doesn't look that strange for a commercial products EULA. Frankly I think we all have violated EULA many times on many devices/software. I do agree that accepting donations does create a different situation, but I don't think anyone should be scared off by it. Just read a Windows EULA, or the FBI warning on a DVD, or listen to the NBA rights (or lack thereof) before any game.
They make it excessively broad so that if they elect to they can crack down on any modders (if it cuts into their bottom line) by issuing cease and desist orders. Since TapUI is still making money by including it (even if we don't use it) and we aren't modifying so much as removing it I think there is very minimal chance of legal difficulty.
Then again, stranger things have happened.

Whoever (Ok, mgmt Roebeet) decided to include TnT was either a relative, or a used car salesman. If anyone had actually used the device instead of just listening to someone talk it up in a meeting I can't see it ever being released.
And I mean no disrespect to used car salesman by comparing them to whoever sold VS on TnT.

akodoreign said:
One reason I bought the sears warrenty for 60 bucks. So I am not to worried if Viewsonic is going to honor their warrenty
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I bought the extended warranty from Staples.

Closing - keeping for informational purposes only.

Things that need to be improved for future Development

First i must give a standing ovation to the DARK FORCES TEAM (D.F.T.) on there accomplishment on the win phone 7 os as i am very impressed with performance.
Second my recommendations to improve the future builds.
1 change the phone identification in the os from HTCLEO to HD7 so as u no longer have to go through as much trouble to activate live services.
2. make os preactivated or precracked for live services. (This May Seem as a difficult task but in actuality its not.. A good Example would be windows xp as many people have made various keygens and cracks to bypass activation, there is even a hacked version of xp where it is preactivated with genuine certificates working so dont tell me it cant be done, if anything u could come up with a registry patch that activates win phone 7's os,
if u were able to accomplish these 2 things DFT you would be the gods of Phone modding, hacking, integration, and os development (Although many already think of u as such but why not take it to the next level?)

Your requests clearly tend into the "hacking" and "warez" direction. I don´t think both of your requests will be easily fulfilled, and if, you won´t find the solution here at xda.
From my gutt feeling, I believe that the current solution stays in the grey zone where all the "classic" flashing, hacking, tweaking and modding has been for years, but overriding activation routines breaks laws.
Frankly spoken, getting the activation code from the OS maker is not a big issue as of now. In a year or two, many HD2 users will have moved on, either to Android, or maybe to WP7, or iOS, who knows - but HD2 will be outdated sometime.
I myself would much more prefer to get a properly working camera, that´s it.

very understandable about the law issues, but correct me if im wrong, did we not already break the laws by customizing the os in the beginning??? im not the most knowledgeable on this and by no means do i want to start a controversy, i just figure if we have already come this far go all the way..

Well... I'm pretty sure there is no law against porting OS's to devices besides the fact that it could break your warranty.
And Microsoft said they would not add the WP7 update to previous devices because it doesn't meet their hardware standards, but they never said it would be ported on to previous devices.
Furthermore, at the moment you have to call Microsoft for an activation key that they generate on the spot for any phone, model, etc... They even ask if you need a key before asking for your name, email, phone number and other information (at least they did for me), so in a way, they are promoting this behaviour.
So there is nothing completely wrong with doing this at all, but it sounds like you just don't want to call Microsoft for key that takes all of 5 minutes.
And what tictac0566 is right. All we do is take their OS and move it to our phone. That's like installing Windows 7 to your exclusive Dell Windows XP.
And we have not customised the OS that much as of yet.

darkowler said:
very understandable about the law issues, but correct me if im wrong, did we not already break the laws by customizing the os in the beginning??? im not the most knowledgeable on this and by no means do i want to start a controversy, i just figure if we have already come this far go all the way..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Forgive some of the answers, we don't mean to be mean . You see, sometimes it's difficult to distinguish most of the good intentions in touchy subjects like this one. It might be that it has been asked repeatedly with it only ending on a flame war or perhaps something along the lines and some are getting tired of it. It's not your fault bro.
Let me put it into perspective though, as far as I'm concerned, yes.. technically speaking, porting WP7 goes against the licensing terms. As a matter of fact, we aren't really supposed to do it at all. But then again, the same can be said about Winmo and all its variants.
In the past MS has stated that as long as only the software that has been shipped on the cellphone is included sans any commercial software you'd have to buy normally, then it's a go. I believe we could assume the same about WP7 for the time being. Asides it helps them find bugs faster and treat like a big beta-testing but just in real life by XDA.
I believe Microsoft isn't much bothered by it or rather is not a threat. But the moment you mess with it's DRM or rather the services (XBOX mainly to be specific) being protected by whatever algorithm Microsoft has put in place it then you are already touching their crown jewel.
Hacking the device for tiles is not a priority for MS, but hack the Live services and this can only assure or give the impression anyone can tinker enough to hack to cheat on the Live service (which is rather amusing, since hacking gamer points and scores is just so wrong in so many levels).
I'd say it's just like the Xbox console. As long as you don't mess with Xbox Live, then most of the hacks aren't really blocked unlike Sony, which sued the pants off everyone and now that is why the PS3 was gutted to pieces recently. I hope that helps a little more.

An Excellent Rant

http://tl.gd/drbuch
(cue Chef Excellence music sting)
Sent from Remilla, my stock ASUS Transformer

That's "excellent"
It sounds like a baby about to "make" in his diaper.

QQ moar
10chars

chatch15117 said:
QQ moar
10chars
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you want to know how old I am....?
I had to google the urban dictionary to find out what that meant!

HAHA Love that website i sit there and press random learn new words lol

A rant for sure. Not sure if it's excellent.

It's an idiots rant. Listen, companies want to keep people from rooting and putting on their own ROMs because ultimately there will always be some knucklehead out their that bricks their device or burns out their CPU because they overclocked their 1Ghz processor to 5Ghz and then they have the nerve to expect a company to cover it under warranty.
Honestly, if I developed a hardware product, I would want to make it as tamper proof as possible for that very reason. Yet, I can also understand the desire to be able to do what you want with your device when you buy it. So what is the solution? Something similar to what HTC has done with the Evo 3D where they will unlock the bootloader, but you lose your right to your warranty. I consider that a fair exchange personally, and I understand the reason why.

ExploreMN said:
It's an idiots rant. Listen, companies want to keep people from rooting and putting on their own ROMs because ultimately there will always be some knucklehead out their that bricks their device or burns out their CPU because they overclocked their 1Ghz processor to 5Ghz and then they have the nerve to expect a company to cover it under warranty.
Honestly, if I developed a hardware product, I would want to make it as tamper proof as possible for that very reason. Yet, I can also understand the desire to be able to do what you want with your device when you buy it. So what is the solution? Something similar to what HTC has done with the Evo 3D where they will unlock the bootloader, but you lose your right to your warranty. I consider that a fair exchange personally, and I understand the reason why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exaaaaactly. You want root? Fine. Here. Your warranty is forever void now.

ExploreMN said:
It's an idiots rant. Listen, companies want to keep people from rooting and putting on their own ROMs because ultimately there will always be some knucklehead out their that bricks their device or burns out their CPU because they overclocked their 1Ghz processor to 5Ghz and then they have the nerve to expect a company to cover it under warranty.
Honestly, if I developed a hardware product, I would want to make it as tamper proof as possible for that very reason. Yet, I can also understand the desire to be able to do what you want with your device when you buy it. So what is the solution? Something similar to what HTC has done with the Evo 3D where they will unlock the bootloader, but you lose your right to your warranty. I consider that a fair exchange personally, and I understand the reason why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am in mixed minds about the whole thing really. PC manufacturers don't feel the need to lock down computers as much as phones are. The more locked down something is the more likely someone trying to avoid locks will screw things up.

The "secure boot" sub-rant is actually more pressing than the TF rant. I expect "mobile" devices to be locked down, and half the fun of playing with them is giving the company the finger and voiding the warranty.
Messing with my PC so that I can't install whatever OS I want on it is going too far, though. As far as I can tell, "secure boot" is either a way to force every Linux distro to pay for a signed cryptographic certificate in order to be installed on a "secure boot" PC, or a way to utterly disallow anything other than Windows8 to be installed on that PC.

Personally I wish that even PC's were like Android devices, but with the freedom to erase Windows and install *BSD or Linux at will retained .
In my experience the most troublesome majority of Windows users are too incompetent to have the equal of root access to their own machine, except to make more work for people that want to fix or break their machine. So I am in favour of the idea, sure...here's your Windows 9 PC, then charge an unlocking fee to enable making an Administrator account that can be accessed by the purchaser instead of Microsoft Update. Then we could just make extra money off whiny snots complaining none of their NOT NT ready crapware works any more, and remind them that the warrentee is void .
There's no substitute for inteligence. Stupid tax ftw!
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

To all:
The Twitter post that I originally made was to let off some stream that I had with ASUS locking down the Transformer with no official way to unlock the device. I mean, rooting/unlocking is risky, but in responsible hands, it's no big deal. Yes, I see your points about the TF being a mobile device, not as a netbook, and that it should be locked by default, but I use it like a netbook, and I think it's pretty reasonable for it to be considered one, but I agree that newbies should not be tampering with the clock speed of the device, just too risky.
The main point of the post was: Why didn't ASUS provide a official way to unlock devices? They should either follow HTC and provide unlocking via a website, or just let me use "fastboot oem unlock".
Oh, and why are no HTC AT&T phones unlockable via htcdev.com?
Sent from Sukia, my rooted HTC Inspire.