Related
Hi
Anybody knows which wifi Chipset is installed into the Liquid?
We could have some nice surprise like with the Nexus One which hosts a Broadcom BCM4329EKUBG capable of 802.11n and not advertised
I've read there is a BCM4325 chip in the Liquid and according to the official site it doesn't support 802.11n.
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4325
Grtz
I thought that was appart of the update? I don't seem to have that? Is it like the trackball that they released the driver/api and some dev has to make a app to use it now? I was hopeful for the transmitter more than a reciver but I guess I am a big dreamer ;-)
That was never confirmed to be apart of the update - it was simply speculation that evolved into false hope.
Do we know for sure that the FM hardware exists?
wick12345 said:
I thought that was appart of the update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you provide a link to where/when Google stated that it would be part of 2.2?
Bet you can't
AndroidPerson said:
Do we know for sure that the FM hardware exists?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes we do...
Oddly, an app called "HTC Radio Info" is in the manage applications, all tab. Not sure if this has already been discussed?
Anyways, it was never confirmed, just speculated upon. And if it is an API, then I am sure we will see something come of it in due time.
Well, I have been skeptical about the FM radio because of the chip name.
"Of interest is a Broadcom chip labeled Broadcom BCM4329EKUBG. Why? Well, the BCM4329 (albeit, without the "EKUBG" qualifier) is capable of 802.11n (HTC only lists 802.11b/g) WiFi in addition to FM transmitter and receiver."
The chip name is not the same as the one with FM t/r but has been said to have it, which is pure speculation.
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329
But the Nexus One DOES have a wireless N radio and you can connect to N only networks.
evilkorn said:
Well, I have been skeptical about the FM radio because of the chip name.
"Of interest is a Broadcom chip labeled Broadcom BCM4329EKUBG. Why? Well, the BCM4329 (albeit, without the "EKUBG" qualifier) is capable of 802.11n (HTC only lists 802.11b/g) WiFi in addition to FM transmitter and receiver."
The chip name is not the same as the one with FM t/r but has been said to have it, which is pure speculation.
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and in addition even if the chip supports it the fm radio section might not be connected. On these types of devices that have fm receivers they are usually wired to use the headphones as an antenna since an fm antenna is far too large to fit in the device. Ours might not have that much needed connection.
Mike
IF we got it this would not be the first device I have owned that a supposedly not working/not connected fm radio module suddenly became a working/connected fm module. Not saying one way or the other but its absence is not absolute proof.
Paul from modaco has managed to get it to tune into stations, but just not get any audio out.
krabman said:
IF we got it this would not be the first device I have owned that a supposedly not working/not connected fm radio module suddenly became a working/connected fm module. Not saying one way or the other but its absence is not absolute proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has a precedent, though - update for HTC Touch CDMA (HTC Vogue) enabling GPS receiver that was unused until then, existing in Qualcomm MSM7500 CPU of the Vogue.
So it was done before. The question is - would Google bother or would they just skip it and leave it to the community (if it's feasible at all, given that Desire has the same chip and connections - which isn't confirmed).
Thats what I mean I had a touch diamond NAM version with supposedly no fm because of some hardware deal and sure enough despite HTCs assurances that it could not be done the community got fm going after a time. I would bet there are other examples besides these.
Go to the bluetooth menu under ##DEBUG# with 2.2.1 and you'll see it says BCM4329 which is a 2.1+EDR chip. Right under that it will flat out say "BT_SPEC_VERSION_2_1".
Edit: Sorry for posting in the dev forum, I forgot I was still on there.
No. Epic 4G has bluetooth 2.1 and other galaxy s's have bluetooth 3.0. Simple is that and samsung did not lure about that.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Hmm, what chip do the other phones use?
Also, what's this supposed to mean? https://www.bluetooth.org/tpg/QLI_viewQDL.cfm?qid=16676
However, I noticed that the BCM4329 family does claim to have both FM receiver and transmitter capabilities... but then I guess that doesn't mean this particular chip, by the way it was worded - I hope it's not just wishful thinking
styles420 said:
However, I noticed that the BCM4329 family does claim to have both FM receiver and transmitter capabilities... but then I guess that doesn't mean this particular chip, by the way it was worded - I hope it's not just wishful thinking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of phones have FM chips disabled. The Nexus One has this same chip actually and a lot of people tried getting FM transmitting to work but I haven't seen anything yet.
I emailed someone at Phonescoop and they say the phone has Bluetooth 3.0 and linked me to the same certification site I posted previously.
Isn't Bluetooth 3.0 effectively do authentication via bluetooth and send file over wifi? not to mention not too many devices support it :/
Bluetooth 4.0 introduces most of the goodies.. like low power mode..
Hey guys,
before I hijack another Thread again, have som high-res pictures of the i9305 Board. I identified the Chips I could, but I couldn't get Info on all of them... I am posting this because we were wondering if the 9305 has FM Radio or not. (And it seems like it doesn't...)
Anyway find them pics here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nqqcbf0er57josh/Oaby-BzY9g
Cheers
Good Idea maybe someone with hardware knowledge can confirm But i cant see anything that looks like the chip andreilux was showing and that chip in the same location is blurry i cant see how many legs it has or any numbers on it
---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:27 PM ----------
This is also an interesting read
http://www.nab.org/xert/scitech/pdfs/rd031411.pdf
Which is probably why the dumbass samsung worker said its up to the carriers if they wish to include fm software maybe she was mistaken with another galaxy but unless someone can confirm it has the hardware then that worker obviously doesnt know what she is talking about
And I was doing a search and It came up under the I9300 detailed analasys a list of all the I9300 hardware
Network:
Broadcom BCM4334 - latest ultra low power solution for smartphones
Wi-fi 802.11 a/b/g/n
Bluetooth 4
Contains FM receiver (unused, Si4709 instead) <<<<<< Does this mean that the broadcom also has a fm receiver but they dont use it instead they use the SiLabs Silicon chip?
Does the I9305 have the Broadcom BCM4334??
I don't know about the Broadcom Chip, but I suspect it as this one Chip I couldn't identify... Yes, this one has a FM Receiver, but it also may be useless if it's not connected anywhere. We don't know that and we can't test that. At least I can't with my humble equipment
langer hans said:
I don't know about the Broadcom Chip, but I suspect it as this one Chip I couldn't identify... Yes, this one has a FM Receiver, but it also may be useless if it's not connected anywhere. We don't know that and we can't test that. At least I can't with my humble equipment
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Wireless-LAN/802.11-Wireless-LAN-Solutions/BCM4334
If you read there it says .... The chip includes IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n single-stream MAC/baseband/radio, Bluetooth 4.0 + HS, and an integrated FM radio receiver.
I thought if its on the board it means its already wired up
A Chip beeing on a board doesn't imply it beeing fully wired up. Maybe they get a good price for this chip so they don't care about the FM part. And for why they used another chip on the 9300: I guess it was easier to layout. Maybe better reception, license fees or whatnot.
ahh well there goes that idea then... lol
I was reading this thread before http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1059296
Mentions a list of products and ours was in the list but note what it says. Its funny how everyone says maybe this maybe that
Says:
These devices will likely never be able to support FM with Spirit or any FM app: (But you never know. OG Motorola Droid was found to be FM audio capable, almost 3 years after introduction in Oct. 2009)
This was in the list
- Samsung Galaxy S3 US/Canada/Japan SC-06D/etc LTE versions do not have needed WCN3660 and Broadcom combo chip FM antenna pin not connected. GT-i9305 also appears incapable of FM. NEW: GT-i9305 / 9305T may have FM hardware, but stock, un-rooted ROMs are not capable.
I also found out yes we do have the BroadCom 4334 its a Murata chipset with FM capabilities But I think one pin of the chip is not connected to anything and that is the FM. Even the I9300 have this chipset and the same pin is not connected they instead use the SiLabs FM chipset
btemtd said:
Says:
These devices will likely never be able to support FM with Spirit or any FM app: (But you never know. OG Motorola Droid was found to be FM audio capable, almost 3 years after introduction in Oct. 2009)
This was in the list
- Samsung Galaxy S3 US/Canada/Japan SC-06D/etc LTE versions do not have needed WCN3660 and Broadcom combo chip FM antenna pin not connected. GT-i9305 also appears incapable of FM. NEW: GT-i9305 / 9305T may have FM hardware, but stock, un-rooted ROMs are not capable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, what I write there is based on what you guys are saying and we're all trying to find out together.
Re: telephone reps on the subject of whether or not a device supports FM: They seem to be accurate about 50-60% of the time. In fairness to them, they get little info from above and are not usually too tech savvy.
To many of these phone/support people, "FM" can include all the streaming apps that have "FM" in the title (when IMO they should say "streaming" or similar.) And there are SO many phones, and variants of hardware and software, coming out at a frantic pace, that it's difficult for them or ANY of us to figure out what's going on, unless we see a stock FM app, and someone reports it works.
As for the Broadcom BCM4330/4334/etc. chips for Bluetooth/Wifi, yes they all have FM receive (and transmit, but don't ask) hardware capability. But I think at least half of the devices using them don't use the FM part, and don't have the antenna pin(s) connected, nor the audio pins. And Broadcom has most of the market for "combo" chips.
So far I think every higher end Galaxy device uses Broadcom for Bluetooth and WiFi, and not a single one uses the FM part. This includes Galaxy S/S2/S3/Note/Note2/Player. If any of these devices has FM, it's via a dedicated Silicon Labs chip: Si4709 or Si4705 on GS3 at least.
Trying to clarify the stories of reports of FM on GT-i9305:
- The Youtube video demo showed an FM app. AFAICT that person started the app and heard radio type static, but no signals. He said he was in a rural area with few signals, so who knows.
But I've written elsewhere that I think hearing static is a good sign, as it proves the audio path and FM chip are there, IMO.
- My second point relates to the Note2. I previously mistakenly thought it was for 9305, but it was Note2, perhaps the GT-i7100 model. But there are similarities between Note2 (or at least the GT-i7105 variant) and GT-i9305.
Around the time of unveiling of the Note2 I saw videos that briefly showed an FM app in the app drawer. But I don't recall any video/demo showing the FM app working, or any specific claim it was tried and worked.
- Before anyone brings it up, Internet phone spec sites are notoriously bad at small detail accuracy, particularly for FM.
mikereidis said:
Trying to clarify the stories of reports of FM on GT-i9305:
- The Youtube video demo showed an FM app. AFAICT that person started the app and heard radio type static, but no signals. He said he was in a rural area with few signals, so who knows.
But I've written elsewhere that I think hearing static is a good sign, as it proves the audio path and FM chip are there, IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The sound platforms are different for all the devices. Fact is globally all LTE variations of the S3 and Note 2 lack FM radio support, even if they magically had the hardware or pin-ups, the basic defconfig in all the kernels have the FM_RADIO base configuration turned off, not to mention the lack of GPIO pin definitions to it in any of the boards.
I would love to see a teardown of a 9305T now to see if they've installed another bandfilter to 'break' 2100MHz reception!!!
I see a chip in the GT-i9305 pics in the same position as the si4705 FM chip on the GT-i9300. It's about half the length and width (1/4 area) as on the GT-i9300 but it's there.
It could be a Silicon Labs FM chip in a smaller package size, and that's my "bet" for what it is.
In the "FM is off topic, please don't post about FM" thread, I think the best page of posts is here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1932997&page=6 . AndreiLux posted a pic there showing the Si4705 between the Murata/Broadcom BT/WiFi/FM combo module/chip and the chip.
BTW, the Si4705 is U203 in the GT-i9300 service manual. There's an error claiming the Si4705 is u711, which is actually a big camera chip I guess.
There are GT-i9305 pics here: http://imgur.com/a/ypxOf#aS29c and I think best pic/resolution is pic 6 of 11 (0?) here: http://imgur.com/a/ypxOf#aS29c
In that pic 6, the Murata/Broadcom module is at lower left. Immediately to it's right is a small surface mount component at top, and below it what may be a chip.
Move to the right from the component and you see what I think is the Silicon Labs FM chip. There are several solder bumps.
For reference, further to the right and below is the white push button switch.
----
Software wise, my suspicion would be that a kernel for the GT-i9300 that supported the chip would "magically" support this alleged FM chip, using whatever constants and port values worked for 9300. It's the same Exynos SOC pretty much, and the board layouts are similar, right ?
ewok666 said:
I would love to see a teardown of a 9305T now to see if they've installed another bandfilter to 'break' 2100MHz reception!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The I9305 Runs on the 2100mhz are you saying that the I9305T may not?
---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:11 PM ----------
mikereidis said:
----
Software wise, my suspicion would be that a kernel for the GT-i9300 that supported the chip would "magically" support this alleged FM chip, using whatever constants and port values worked for 9300. It's the same Exynos SOC pretty much, and the board layouts are similar, right ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes its the same exynos SOC and layous are similar .
Maybe andreilux has some input on your post, its very interesting.
btemtd said:
Yes its the same exynos SOC and layous are similar .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the email log. So yours is a 9305 on Vodafone AU ?
I have another log from a 9305T on Telstra AU, but it wasn't rooted so I get less info.
The only sign of FM on either device is the "FM In" control in the ALSA audio driver. This doesn't prove anything one way or another though; "phantom" controls on variants are common.
If anyone can look closer at the FM chip and Murata module area, please do, and if you can, post high res pictures.
Besides that I look forward to someone building and installing a kernel with the Samsung Si4709_driver / radio-si4709-i2c drivers enabled, either in the main kernel or as loadable *.ko drivers. There are alternative V4L drivers for si470x but the Samsung ones are preferred for my app, and needed for the Samsung app.
IMO, a kernel dev could pretty much use the config from a GT-i9300.
These investigations usually end in defeat, and I could be wrong, but I'm feeling optimistic about this one with the evidence so far.
I see 4 kernel variants:
GT-I9305
GT-I930N
GT-I9305T_SEA
GT-I9305_HK
All use arch/arm/configs/m3_00_defconfig and none have the FM driver enabled. Interestingly GT-I9305_HK m3_00_variant_defconfig has some stuff for variants, but nothing impacts FM:
3vzw="CONFIG_TARGET_LOCALE_USA=y CONFIG_MACH_M3_USA_VZW=y"
m3vzw_undef="TARGET_LOCALE_EUR \
SND_USE_LINEOUT_SWITCH USB_SERIAL_CSVT"
m3spr="CONFIG_TARGET_LOCALE_USA=y CONFIG_MACH_M3_USA_SPR=y"
m3spr_undef="TARGET_LOCALE_EUR \
SND_USE_LINEOUT_SWITCH USB_SERIAL_CSVT"
m3tmo="CONFIG_TARGET_LOCALE_USA=y CONFIG_MACH_M3_USA_TMO=y"
m3tmo_undef="TARGET_LOCALE_EUR \
SND_USE_LINEOUT_SWITCH USB_SERIAL_CSVT"
m3att="CONFIG_TARGET_LOCALE_USA=y CONFIG_MACH_M3_USA_ATT=y"
m3att_undef="TARGET_LOCALE_EUR \
SND_USE_LINEOUT_SWITCH USB_SERIAL_CSVT"
m3dcm="CONFIG_TARGET_LOCALE_JPN=y CONFIG_MACH_M3_JPN_DCM=y \
CONFIG_EXYNOS4_MSHC_SUPPORT_PQPRIME_EPLL=y \
CONFIG_FELICA=y CONFIG_ISDBT=y CONFIG_ISDBT_FC8150=y"
m3dcm_undef="TARGET_LOCALE_EUR \
SND_USE_LINEOUT_SWITCH USB_SERIAL_CSVT NFC_DEVICES PN65N_NFC"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From the m0_00_defconfig file for GT-i9300 I think we need these 3 lines, but not sure about "Samsung Modules":
CONFIG_SAMSUNG_MODULES=y
CONFIG_FM_RADIO=y
CONFIG_FM_SI4705=y
mikereidis said:
Thanks for the email log. So yours is a 9305 on Vodafone AU ?
I have another log from a 9305T on Telstra AU, but it wasn't rooted so I get less info.
The only sign of FM on either device is the "FM In" control in the ALSA audio driver. This doesn't prove anything one way or another though; "phantom" controls on variants are common.
If anyone can look closer at the FM chip and Murata module area, please do, and if you can, post high res pictures.
Besides that I look forward to someone building and installing a kernel with the Samsung Si4709_driver / radio-si4709-i2c drivers enabled, either in the main kernel or as loadable *.ko drivers. There are alternative V4L drivers for si470x but the Samsung ones are preferred for my app, and needed for the Samsung app.
IMO, a kernel dev could pretty much use the config from a GT-i9300.
These investigations usually end in defeat, and I could be wrong, but I'm feeling optimistic about this one with the evidence so far.
Downloading the Samung kernel source now to see if their config disables the FM driver. Will edit this post with an answer.
I see 4 kernel variants:
GT-I9305
GT-I930N
GT-I9305T_SEA
GT-I9305_HK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes Vodafone is my network provider, I will see if OP can get High res pics... And Andreilux already made the kernel with FM but didnt want to release it untill 100% sure about FM... becuase it may brick a device??
btemtd said:
Yes Vodafone is my network provider, I will see if OP can get High res pics... And Andreilux already made the kernel with FM but didnt want to release it untill 100% sure about FM... becuase it may brick a device??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I seriously doubt bricking potential, but with software you never ever know for sure until you try. Communications with the chip is via I2C, not potentially dangerous GPIOs. but there are some GPIOs used for power and who knows what else.
I note that this is a somewhat new si4705 driver Samsung has in drivers/samsung/fm_si47xx for GT-i9300, although it seems little different from the Galaxy S/S2/Note fm_si4709 driver, at first glance at least.
For anyone interested, there is some useful information here about FM missing from the original US LTE GS3s, compared to GT-i9300: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=31576462
There are various pics, schematic excerpts and a bit about the differences with Si4705 versus the si4709 of the International Galaxy S/S2/Notes.
btemtd said:
The I9305 Runs on the 2100mhz are you saying that the I9305T may not?
---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:11 PM ----------
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I'm saying that on past 'T' models the 2100MHz band was attenuated to reduce signal and make them prefer other bands. This is a link but the discussion has been had here before and you should be able to find pictures showing the element discussed.
http://webdevsys.com/gt-i9100t.htm
mikereidis said:
I seriously doubt bricking potential, but with software you never ever know for sure until you try. Communications with the chip is via I2C, not potentially dangerous GPIOs. but there are some GPIOs used for power and who knows what else.
I note that this is a somewhat new si4705 driver Samsung has in drivers/samsung/fm_si47xx for GT-i9300, although it seems little different from the Galaxy S/S2/Note fm_si4709 driver, at first glance at least.
For anyone interested, there is some useful information here about FM missing from the original US LTE GS3s, compared to GT-i9300: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=31576462
There are various pics, schematic excerpts and a bit about the differences with Si4705 versus the si4709 of the International Galaxy S/S2/Notes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good research Mike! we'll just wait till andreilux joins the convo, as he has the knowledge of creating the Kernel side.
Also you might like to know that apparently the Law in hong kong restricts the use of Fm radio in Mobile devices, as i have been told by a few suppliers.
ewok666 said:
No, I'm saying that on past 'T' models the 2100MHz band was attenuated to reduce signal and make them prefer other bands. This is a link but the discussion has been had here before and you should be able to find pictures showing the element discussed.
http://webdevsys.com/gt-i9100t.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whether it's true or not, my i9305T appears to have equal or better reception on optus than my i9000 (hard to tell 100% but it certainly crazy fast with H+ at my home! My i9000 was almost always crawling on H (hsdpa? the naming scheme really confuses me). I may try to install a stock i9305 modem in future to test though
Well i know for a fact the i9305 is fine on every network in australia just depends on the providor on what speed and quality you will get. And yes we have Dc-hspa+ which is 2 times faster then normal 3g hspa+ ...which is why your getting high speeds. Our phone will still only show h+ if we are on DC i already looked into that .Just imagine 4g.. browsing will go on yet a whole other level again! Lol
I think the 9305t is the same thing to be honest unless telstra did restrict a band to force people to stick with them. That is what you would call a big shifty company.
Becausr the i9300t was the same as the i9300. So i am only assuming this would be the same
Sent from my GT-I9305 using xda app-developers app
btemtd said:
The I9305 Runs on the 2100mhz are you saying that the I9305T may not?
---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:11 PM ----------
Yes its the same exynos SOC and layous are similar .
Maybe andreilux has some input on your post, its very interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
btemtd said:
Well i know for a fact the i9305 is fine on every network in australia just depends on the providor on what speed and quality you will get. And yes we have Dc-hspa+ which is 2 times faster then normal 3g hspa+ ...which is why your getting high speeds. Our phone will still only show h+ if we are on DC i already looked into that .Just imagine 4g.. browsing will go on yet a whole other level again! Lol
I think the 9305t is the same thing to be honest unless telstra did restrict a band to force people to stick with them. That is what you would call a big shifty company.
Becausr the i9300t was the same as the i9300. So i am only assuming this would be the same
Sent from my GT-I9305 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't say much about the i9300 vs i9300T or the i9305 for that matter BUT what I do know is that the i9100 was supposed to be the same as the i9100T and it very clearly was not. From my own experience the i9100T was sh1t in some areas where an i9100 was perfectly fine and a teardown showed a bandfilter where the i9100 had none.
On Whirlpool is a guy who flashed the Singapore firmware onto his Telstra i9305T and promptly lost 4G. He flashed back the Telstra firmware and got 4G back. I have the Singapore firmware on an i9305 (non T) and my 4G works just fine.
Now, you tell me what to conclude from this but I will not spend a single cent on another T model....I just don't need this kind of crap! (and by crap I don't mean the phone itself but rather the practice of crippling something that works perfectly fine just so you can force your customers one way or the other!)
Miracast is missing from Nexus 7's Android 4.2 release and we are all sad... and now you are seeing people say that Miracast will never come to Nexus 7 because it doesn't have Dual band wireless which is required.
Well I don't believe that Miracast requires Dual Band and here is why (good intro right?.. I wrote it myself)
Quoted from the Miracast whitepaper:
To be certified for Miracast, a device must also be Wi-Fi CERTIFIED for:
• Wi-Fi CERTIFIED n
• WPA2
• Wi-Fi Direct
• WMM
• Wi-Fi Protected Setup
While it is expected that TDLS certification will be commonly pursued for Miracast–certified devices, it is an optional component of the Miracast certification process. Miracast and TDLS are complementary, and vendors seeking Miracast certification for their products have the flexibility to choose whether they want to support TDLS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only thing I see see in the required list that would possibly have a bandwidth requirement would be Wi-Fi Direct (please correct me if i'm wrong) and Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5Ghz
Quoted from Wifi Alliance's FAQ page (http://www.wi-fi.org/knowledge-cent...-wi-fi-direct-certification-program-work-both):
Does the specification underlying the Wi-Fi Direct certification program work on both frequency bands?
Yes, the specification underlying the Wi-Fi Direct certification program supports operation in both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Devices operating in the 2.4 GHz frequency band only and devices operating in both the 2.4GHz and 5 GHz frequency bands can be certified under the Wi-Fi Direct program. Not all Wi-Fi Direct-certified devices will support both frequency bands, however, so you should check which bands your devices support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The TDLS Comment is interesting however as it does deal with Dual Band devices (see below). But again TDLS is optional for Miracast.
Quoted from TDLS Whitepaper (https://www.wi-fi.org/sites/default/files/uploads/20120808 TDLS White Paper FINAL.pdf):
In addition, TDLS also provides support for devices to negotiate an alternative channel. For example, if the two TDLS-linked devices are dual-band they may choose to dynamically switch to a 40MHz 802.11n channel in the 5 GHz band. The net result is a significant improvement in performance, latency and network capacity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It may perform like crap or have to be set to a hidiously small resolution (which could explain why Google decided to not include it off the bat) but there seems to be no reason why it won't work once some custom ROMs/APKs come out for it... Deep breath everybody.
Also, I'm a newb here and can only post every 5 mins till I get some "Thank-Love." If this helped anyone I'd sure appreciate a thumbs up.
To add to this, esrlabs made their own variant of miracast called android transporter and it's only currently for the nexus 7. It doesn't have sound current as it was just a tech demo.
sark666 said:
To add to this, esrlabs made their own variant of miracast called android transporter and it's only currently for the nexus 7. It doesn't have sound current as it was just a tech demo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
would love to see this functionality built into cyanogen eventually...
Sent from my Nexus 7
OP sounds right to me. Dual band is just nice to have because you could hypothetically segment Miracast from non-Miracast traffic. It's not necessary so I can imagine the N7 will support Miracast in due time.
The more I think of it, the major rom builder may shy away from building miracast into future builds for fear of infringement. Not sure how its all licensed but its very likely that the miracast portion is proprietary.
Our best hope may come from independent ports. Time will tell.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
ezieger said:
The more I think of it, the major rom builder may shy away from building miracast into future builds for fear of infringement. Not sure how its all licensed but its very likely that the miracast portion is proprietary.
Our best hope may come from independent ports. Time will tell.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so, Miracast is an open standard by the Wi-Fi Alliance. It probably costs money to be Miracast certified but ROM builders don't care about that.
Miracast is built into the 4.2 firmware for N4 but not yet N7 and N10. Why is that? Look to to the quote below from the Miracast wikipedia page.
Miracast software needs low level access to hardware supporting Wi-Fi Direct, there is no portable Wi-Fi Direct API for different SoCs and platforms. The lack of a single Application Programming Interface compatible with different Wi-Fi Direct supported hardware platforms makes it difficult for software developers to design portable Miracast Source or Sink applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it will just take some time. Less than six months, hopefully.
ezieger said:
The only thing I see see in the required list that would possibly have a bandwidth requirement would be Wi-Fi Direct (please correct me if i'm wrong) and Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5Ghz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5GHz. I have the PTV3000 and I am stuck on my Nexus 7 at the same point I am with my 3 month old ASUS laptop with 3rd Gen Ivy Bridge i5. My laptop has a Qualcomm Atheros AR9485 wireless network chip. The Atheros is only 2.4 GHz but the AR9485 also includes 150 Mbps Data Rate, Atheros Direct ConnectTM peer-to-peer technology and is Wi-Fi Alliance CERTIFIED.
Intel's site is full of people ticked off that lost Wi-Di when they upgraded from Windows 7 to 8 that stopped working on their PTV2000/3000. I didn't get the PTV3000 before I upgraded to Windows 8 so I was doing a lot of research on my AR9485 that as I said is only 2.4 GHz.
So now I have a PTV3000, Nexus 7 and Laptop that none of them play together.
Netgear has sold so many of these damn ptv3000s on the basis of it being precertified for miracast and the expectation that the N7 would be. I'd love to see the sales numbers. Betting they spiked in the last two weeks and are back to almost nada. The whole situation is pretty frustrating.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
Just to confirm, the ptv3000 is not certified for miracast? Doesn't it advertise that? I was going to pick one up if I saw one cheap (although with n7 currently not having miracast my interest has waned) but if it definitely doesn't I'll look elsewhere.
The ptv3000 is pre-certified. It needs a firmware update to be miracast. As of right now it doesn't even work with an N4. Best to just not buy anything until the smoke settles. Unless it's a crazy good deal... lol
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
ezieger said:
The ptv3000 is pre-certified. It needs a firmware update to be miracast. As of right now it doesn't even work with an N4. Best to just not buy anything until the smoke settles. Unless it's a crazy good deal... lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works with Galaxy S3
innov8ion said:
It works with Galaxy S3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you offer a sample? Video, photos, etc.
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sp...allshare-cast-netgear-ptv3000-w-miracast.html
innov8ion said:
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sp...allshare-cast-netgear-ptv3000-w-miracast.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The video doesn't seem to be pulling up on my screen
seriously. no video, no believe.
ezieger said:
The video doesn't seem to be pulling up on my screen
seriously. no video, no believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ask that guy. I'm skeptical too.
miracast not working with asus infinity tf700 either, that has tye
So, after the last firmware update, my Samsung s3 can project to ptv3000 ( though i had to use triangle away on my rooted s3 first). However, no such luck wih my asus inffinty tf700, which has the same isue as nexus 7 -stuck on 2.4ghz... i read somewhere that miracast requires 2.4 ghz to connct and 5 ghz to screencast. This might be true as my tf700 does show connected sometimes, but does not creencast. Asus tech support do not confirm or deny this.
---------- Post added at 10:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:18 PM ----------
So, after the last firmware update, my Samsung s3 can project to ptv3000 ( though i had to use triangle away on my rooted s3 first). However, no such luck wih my asus inffinty tf700, which has the same isue as nexus 7 -stuck on 2.4ghz... i read somewhere that miracast requires 2.4 ghz to connct and 5 ghz to screencast. This might be true as my tf700 does show connected sometimes, but does not creencast. Asus tech support do not confirm or deny this.
Wi fi direct 5 ghz
Does anybody knows if i use wi fi direct with 5ghz , intead of 2.4 ghz, could it reduce the lag while playing fast games like need for speed?
I have a MOTO X, so the only way to see the phine screen on tv is wifi direct or miracast