Database Users

I see news like this, and my brain explodes

So, you see headlines like this:
"Samsung Releases Conquer 4G Kernel Source Code Before The Phone Even Hits Shelves"
http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/0...urce-code-before-the-phone-even-hits-shelves/
And I can't help but think to myself..."OK, so Sammy is starting to see the benefit of getting source code out for its devices, this is good", and then I sit back and reflect upon the fact that the Epic still doesn't have the source code we're looking for (amirite?).
Now, I'm not going to piss and bemoan the fact, BUT, I am going to wonder why it is so. Is there some sort of secret sauce there? Or perhaps is there something VERY embarrassing in their source code? OR, is Sammy really that schizo?
In all, I've been pleased with the steps Sammy has taken. Sure, it would be nice to have me some GB, or even better some CM7, but hey, the Epic is still a great device despite some of the quirks that need to be straightened out.
Thoughts?

Its probably because gb is not being built yet so they don't have it complete. The phone you referenced to the build is probably complete. Yes it us nice to see Sammy doing this though.
"The greatest respect you can earn is self respect" Louie Simmons

musclehead84 said:
Its probably because gb is not being built yet so they don't have it complete. The phone you referenced to the build is probably complete. Yes it us nice to see Sammy doing this though.
"The greatest respect you can earn is self respect" Louie Simmons
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but isn't the problem the CM7 squad is having with our device related to source code for our drivers?

the reason CM7 isn't fully functional for our phones is a kernel and drivers issue. Without GB source for those, we have a hacked together partially working port.

Got it.
Well, if that didn't make your head asplode, then this surely will:
http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbzone.html

It's source code for a finished product. Not exactly the same situation as wanting source code for leaked builds.

MeetFace said:
Yes, but isn't the problem the CM7 squad is having with our device related to source code for our drivers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plus driver source isnt open source so they don't have to give it to us

it ships with GB, what do you mean it's not being built yet? I think they are not releasing source for us because our phones are reaching EOL and they want us to buy new ones.

theduce102 said:
Plus driver source isnt open source so they don't have to give it to us
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What happens if thy never give it to us? Are we screwed?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App

CapsLockKey said:
It's source code for a finished product. Not exactly the same situation as wanting source code for leaked builds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. To clarify, to my knowledge Samsung has released the kernel and GPL platform component sources for every official Epic firmware version a day or two prior to its release.
They don't release sources for leaked builds because those builds were never officially released in the first place.

mkasick said:
Yes. To clarify, to my knowledge Samsung has released the kernel and GPL platform component sources for every official Epic firmware version a day or two prior to its release.
They don't release sources for leaked builds because those builds were never officially released in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This makes rational sense. Would be nice if they released those driver sources this next time around. Would be a good measure to producing goodwill & brand loyalty IMO.

No phone company has ever released driver sources and nor will they. Its open kernel source not open driver source. There is some other reasons they don't release driver source but it would be nice if all phone manufacturers did but that's a perfect world

Phone companies haven't but what about component companies like Nvidia they released Nvflash
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App

xopher.hunter said:
What happens if thy never give it to us? Are we screwed?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. As stated 1000 times, it is 100% possible to write drivers, a kernel and etc from scratch just much more labor intensive than using source code.

Sooo, just wondering if since the conquer 4g is VERY similar to the epic since its gb source code was released would it help us at all?
I'm just asking cause my moment ran on a frankenstein froyo port that came mostly from the transform and a little bit from the intercept and it was awesome.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App

CyanogenMod 9 Construction Under Way

http://briefmobile.com/cyanogenmod-9-construction-under-way

Can't wait to see how well the atrix handles it!
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

I can't wait!
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

BUT is it for the Atrix? I havnt seen a offical Cynogen Mod for the ATrix yet

Symbian_Black said:
BUT is it for the Atrix? I havnt seen a offical Cynogen Mod for the ATrix yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Atrix is officially supported, in nightly builds. Stable build hasn't been accomplished yet.

OSNPA said:
The Atrix is officially supported, in nightly builds. Stable build hasn't been accomplished yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OSNPA, how is the boiled denim business treating you? also I wanna ride in your car and listen to Raise Your Weapon, I know it's really old but I still HAVE to hear it everyday lol.
Sorry to change the subject, well, really I'm not there are like 10 of these threads.

http://source.android.com/source/building-devices.html
Starting with IceCreamSandwich, the Android Open-Source Project can't be used from pure source code only, and requires additional hardware-related proprietary libraries to run, specifically for hardware graphics acceleration.
Official binaries for Nexus S, Nexus S 4G, Galaxy Nexus, and PandaBoard can be downloaded from Google's Nexus driver page, which add access to additional hardware capabilities with non-Open-Source code.
There are no official binaries for Nexus One, ADP2 or ADP1.
So, unless there's an official ICS release for the Atrix, it looks like we may be missing out on the default hardware acceleration. Thank god my upgrade comes up in Feb so I can get off this device and onto a Nexus device.

WiredPirate said:
OSNPA, how is the boiled denim business treating you? also I wanna ride in your car and listen to Raise Your Weapon, I know it's really old but I still HAVE to hear it everyday lol.
Sorry to change the subject, well, really I'm not there are like 10 of these threads.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha...the car hasn't made much progress, we spent a lot of time getting our house on the market and are looking to buy, so all of my free time has been for 'family and home stuff' Someday...

edgeicator said:
http://source.android.com/source/building-devices.html
Starting with IceCreamSandwich, the Android Open-Source Project can't be used from pure source code only, and requires additional hardware-related proprietary libraries to run, specifically for hardware graphics acceleration.
Official binaries for Nexus S, Nexus S 4G, Galaxy Nexus, and PandaBoard can be downloaded from Google's Nexus driver page, which add access to additional hardware capabilities with non-Open-Source code.
There are no official binaries for Nexus One, ADP2 or ADP1.
So, unless there's an official ICS release for the Atrix, it looks like we may be missing out on the default hardware acceleration. Thank god my upgrade comes up in Feb so I can get off this device and onto a Nexus device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sucks. Definitely going for the Galaxy Nexus when I can as well.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

NoNameAtAll said:
That sucks. Definitely going for the Galaxy Nexus when I can as well.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats just another way of saying they dont support gfx drivers in the stock AOSP for other devices - nvidia still provides those for the tegra2, so it should sitll be possible to get hw acceleration on the atrix

its a shame that so many are forced to ditch perfectly capable hardware, simply because of software limitations. that is my initial reaction to the news in this thread.
Additionally, considering the new system for hardware acceleration, how could google release binaries for anything except their AOSP devices? Binaries for Tegra, or any other chipset manufacturer, will have to be made in conjunction with the manufacturer.
Not exactly good news for the Tegra; a very capable, very abandoned, hardware platform. Really didn't want to declare this device dead before its time as I've followed the Tegra since its earliest concepts. If the tegra doesn't get ICS i don't see how it the Kal El will even make a splash.

SirFork said:
its a shame that so many are forced to ditch perfectly capable hardware, simply because of software limitations. that is my initial reaction to the news in this thread.
Additionally, considering the new system for hardware acceleration, how could google release binaries for anything except their AOSP devices? Binaries for Tegra, or any other chipset manufacturer, will have to be made in conjunction with the manufacturer.
Not exactly good news for the Tegra; a very capable, very abandoned, hardware platform. Really didn't want to declare this device dead before its time as I've followed the Tegra since its earliest concepts. If the tegra doesn't get ICS i don't see how it the Kal El will even make a splash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Motorola announced ICS is coming to the Xoom which is a tegra device

Tegra will get ICS from the LG 2X and we'll probably get a port from there. That's the least of the worries.
Many additional drivers will also be needed such as GPS, FP, possibly Bluetooth and wifi...etc
Plus, no official release will, if true, means many bugs and hiccups. That's what I've been saying all along here in the ICS jerking threads.
Sent from my Atrix 4g using Tapatalk

mandrsn1 said:
Motorola announced ICS is coming to the Xoom which is a tegra device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Xoom uses a different Tegra 2 SoC than the Atrix. Our best chances come from G2X, Photon, and Droid 2X. Xoom uses Tegra 250 T20 whereas smartphones use Tegra 250 AP20H. Even then, it's going to be a hack-up job since they aren't the same devices. It will definitely not run as well as if we had an official ICS release.
EDIT: The reason why is that the driver + proprietary libraries needed for hardware acceleration are built for a specific kernel. We don't share kernels with those devices regardless of how similar the devices are. They'd have to compare the 2 different kernels (a 2.3.4 vs a 4.0.1 mind you) and try and merge in the differences necessary to get hardware acceleration working. All in all, it will be the Atrix running on a hacked up gingerbread kernel and drivers trying to run ICS.

Actually, they should be able to hack together and compile a ICS kernel with a mix of GB and ICS drivers. I've done it before for GB on the HTC aria.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

crossix said:
Actually, they should be able to hack together and compile a ICS kernel with a mix of GB and ICS drivers. I've done it before for GB on the HTC aria.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did say that. But the problem is that it just that, a hacked together kernel and gpu driver. radio, wifi, bluetooth, etc. will still be on GB drivers. It would never run as well as if we had native ICS drivers and kernel.

How bout we just wait and find out?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

andrew.cambridge said:
How bout we just wait and find out?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly, that's what we need.
optimism. it might look foolish to some but I really wish no one tries to undermine the atrix 4g community or any other phone community from trying to get ics.
i understand the truth due to the reasoning and it might look like a long shot but it doesn't hurt to stay optimistic.

k0p4n said:
exactly, that's what we need.
optimism. it might look foolish to some but I really wish no one tries to undermine the atrix 4g community or any other phone community from trying to get ics.
i understand the truth due to the reasoning and it might look like a long shot but it doesn't hurt to stay optimistic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could care less at this point. I'm getting a SGN the second my upgrade comes up in February. CM9 would only be at nightlies/alphas at that point and there's no chance that the Atrix would have ICS by february to help CM9 for the Atrix along.

edgeicator said:
I could care less at this point. I'm getting a SGN the second my upgrade comes up in February. CM9 would only be at nightlies/alphas at that point and there's no chance that the Atrix would have ICS by february to help CM9 for the Atrix along.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You must know all this since you know the future huh?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

[Q] Why so few custom ROMS for the S4 Exynos?

Hi Everyone,
I just took delivery of my new S4 Exynos (Octa) and am surprised how few custom ROMS are out there for this device.
I had an S3 and so I'm kinda used to being spoilt for choice when it came to custom ROMS.
Any ideas why there's but a few for the Octa? Is it because of the chipset?
I saw Cyanogen have said they nt going to release any ROMS for the Octa

device is relatively new, exynos always gave headaches to devs of CM.....
give it time, some people said its not worth upgrading from an s3 so... yeah less custom ROMs

Really its a bitter truth...9500 has only 2 or 3 Devs till now with no update and fixes in lias 2 or 3 weeks ..that section seems like ghost busted :
9505 too has not as many Devs as HTC One has...however it has quite good dev support
I think after so many issues in s4 Devs are skipping it [probably] for note 3

lets wait and see in the near future if the outcome is bad, its hammer time !

Gboss01 said:
Hi Everyone,
I just took delivery of my new S4 Exynos (Octa) and am surprised how few custom ROMS are out there for this device.
I had an S3 and so I'm kinda used to being spoilt for choice when it came to custom ROMS.
Any ideas why there's but a few for the Octa? Is it because of the chipset?
I saw Cyanogen have said they nt going to release any ROMS for the Octa
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be clear - CM rarely says that a given device will NEVER be supported. The last time we did that was with the Snapdragon S1 and CM9 - That hardware was simply too weak to support ICS and later.
However, all of the CM maintainers that have worked with past Exynos variants refuse to touch it, and anyone else with maintainer experience saw what we went through with Exynos4 and also seem to be avoiding it.
There is always the possibility that someone new will pick things up - but honestly, I consider the likelihood to be very slim.
So CM support for the "Octa" is POSSIBLE - but it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. I think that AndreiLux was the only experienced low-level (kernels, platform bringup) developer to touch the "Octa", and he's not particularly happy with it so far.

Entropy512 said:
So CM support for the "Octa" is POSSIBLE - but it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. I think that AndreiLux was the only experienced low-level (kernels, platform bringup) developer to touch the "Octa", and he's not particularly happy with it so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Other than the CCI fiasco I'm relatively fine with the phone. I expected and was prepared to bring MP to the device but I guess that's not happening.
As for CM, I think it's more of a problem of lack of interest than actual technical feasibility. I'd happily dwell into the device platform world if I had time but that's not happening anytime soon as I have a backlog of features in the kernel space to do and finish.

AndreiLux said:
Other than the CCI fiasco I'm relatively fine with the phone. I expected and was prepared to bring MP to the device but I guess that's not happening.
As for CM, I think it's more of a problem of lack of interest than actual technical feasibility. I'd happily dwell into the device platform world if I had time but that's not happening anytime soon as I have a backlog of features in the kernel space to do and finish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why you will not bring it anymore?

Gboss01 said:
Hi Everyone,
I just took delivery of my new S4 Exynos (Octa) and am surprised how few custom ROMS are out there for this device.
I had an S3 and so I'm kinda used to being spoilt for choice when it came to custom ROMS.
Any ideas why there's but a few for the Octa? Is it because of the chipset?
I saw Cyanogen have said they nt going to release any ROMS for the Octa
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No CM support does not equal to no dev support just to be clear. There are top.devs here ( Indie and Wanam) and there most likely be more devs to join the party. It is however a surprise that there's only a few Roms for this device at the moment.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

Well because most of the S4 users have the Snapdragon variant. As for CM, as Entropy said, its most probably not going to come out for our device, even if it does, it'll be broken and unusable due to lack of source code/documentation, etc. As for the custom ROMs, we'll have more of them but the best one IMO - Android Revolution HD - is very unlikely for our device.

The Octa is such a great phone yet the support seems to be lacking a little, I mean my Huawei U8800 had more development going on than this phone.
I dont get why alot of people are saying the Octa is crap compared to the S600 when the Octa beats the S600 in every benchmark I've seen.
Is the S600 an easier design to build custom ROMS for?
I have tried Doc Barebones ROM and Wanams Lite ROM. Both work well on the Octa but I found Docs ROM to the give me the highest Antutu scores, always above 30000 with the highest being 30890. Wanam's ROM didn't yield much more than the stock ROM, around 28300, same with the Omega v4 ROM.
I'm back to on the stock firmware, with bloatware removed, for now. having tried those three ROMS I'm itching to try another but alas I cant find any :crying:

Gboss01 said:
Is the S600 an easier design to build custom ROMS for?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes as Qualcomm is much more open source than Exynos. Not open source = pain in the a** to develop.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2

chickentuna said:
Yes as Qualcomm is much more open source than Exynos. Not open source = pain in the a** to develop.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn!
I read some where that Samsung might release the source code for the exynos. Is this true?
And if they did would that make it any easie rto develop ROMS for the Octa?

Just simply harder to develop anything for Exynos, i think.

I'd like to remind everyone that developers spend their own time and money on development.
Basically, unless the developer has a strong interest in a device he will not feel obliged to 'hack' features such as camera, noise canceling and so on.
I miss the old days of the HD2
I hope we can get CM on the 9500 because it will open the door for AOKP and Paranoid-Android and possibly MIUI.
Good luck to the developers.

RIP on i9500 haha just joking ... @AndreiLux are u giving up on i9500 ? oh please dont

As Entropy512 said, the problem is mostly because Exynos has terrible source code support. There are a lot of precompiled modules in the source, and these are tied to the Android version that the source code is for. This means that when a new version of Android comes out, you're stuck waiting for Samsung to catch up.
What the devs (like Entropy) have been trying to do is to create open-source versions of these modules, so that they're not reliant on Samsung. This has been extremely frustrating for them, requiring a lot of work for very little gain.
What would be ideal is for Samsung to provide source code and documentation for these precompiled modules. They're promised to do this several times, but so far have only delivered some code that only works for a reference board, not for the hardware configurations that any of their phones use. Even worse, the source code that is available is based on Gingerbread, and has numerous hacks applied to allow it to work with ICS. In short, it's just broken and will not work.
Qualcomm (Snapdragon), on the other hand, provide very good developer support. They and Texas Instruments (OMAP) have a very good reputation with the devs, with lots of source code and documentation available. That's why Snapdragon and OMAP phones are among the first to be supported when new versions of AOSP/AOKP/CM come out.
The I9500 may do better in the benchmarks than the I9505, but that's one of the few advantages it has.
Sent from my GT-I9505

I am not really interested in anything else but AOSP / CM on this phone. We badly need it.. I think we need to build the force on Twitter so that we can bombard their twitter account (@SamsungExynos) and force them to release at least some sorta source for Exynos.
I already started tweeting them like hell. Yes, they do reply with kind of SAFE sided replies..

Gboss01 said:
Damn!
I read some where that Samsung might release the source code for the exynos. Is this true?
And if they did would that make it any easie rto develop ROMS for the Octa?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they did it would make the world of difference and Exynos would be on a level playing field in development terms as the likes of Snapdragon. Unfortunately, Samsung have been saying that since the original Galaxy S and it still hasn't happened, and it's clear they never intended to release anything and it was nothing more than lip service in an attempt to sell more handsets by appearing developer friendly. It's broken promises like this which has made reputable developers wash their hands with the Exynos chipset and any phones that use it. Unfortunately, this leaves people with the I9500 in a bit of a predicament if they're not fond of TW as it's likely to be their only option for the foreseeable, if not full stop.

Gboss01 said:
Damn!
I read some where that Samsung might release the source code for the exynos. Is this true?
And if they did would that make it any easie rto develop ROMS for the Octa?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exynos open source? Highly unlikely and yes it would be much easier building roms, devs wouldn't even need to have the device to build a working ROM.

gdonanthony said:
RIP on i9500 haha just joking ... @AndreiLux are u giving up on i9500 ? oh please dont
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He never said that, on the contrary he might be having some big plans
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Exynos vs snspdragon

So from the benchmarks I have seen online for the note 3 it looks like the exynos versions of the device is slightly faster not by much. I am happy to see the exynos wifi version will at least be able to keep up with the snap dragon version.
First photo is the exynos variant with a score of 34546
The second photo is the snapdragon variant with a score of 33814
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

I'm glad the Exynos version is coming here as i'm not falling into the snapdragon hype... Wait until they update those kernels for true 8 core. Team Samsung!

Itchiee said:
I'm glad the Exynos version is coming here as i'm not falling into the snapdragon hype... Wait until they update those kernels for true 8 core. Team Samsung!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the real reason people don't like the exynos is that Samsung is not very forthcoming when it comes to releasing the relevant information for building custom kernels and roms, considering that Samsung has already released the source code for this device, it shows real promise
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

Yes, that is one of the reasons. For me I don't change the ROM's on these newer Samsung(s) since you kinda defeat the purpose of the device.
Why install CM on my Note 2 then I lose the S Pen features, the multi tasking...Etc.
And yes I think Samsung is trying to correct itself since it wants to be the major player in the Android world.

I don't see myself going AOSP unless someone integrates some s-pen extra features. Have aosp roms's done this in the past? this will be my first Note.

smac7 said:
I don't see myself going AOSP unless someone integrates some s-pen extra features. Have aosp roms's done this in the past? this will be my first Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I have ever come across unless it was one of those hybrid roms.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

ckavvouras said:
Not that I have ever come across unless it was one of those hybrid roms.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are there touchwhiz based ROMs? (somebody mentioned is somewhere) Would that mean that those ROMs still have the S-Pen functionnality?

The_Maverick said:
Are there touchwhiz based ROMs? (somebody mentioned is somewhere) Would that mean that those ROMs still have the S-Pen functionnality?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes there are on other samsung devices, I don't see this one being any different

The_Maverick said:
Are there touchwhiz based ROMs? (somebody mentioned is somewhere) Would that mean that those ROMs still have the S-Pen functionnality?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most tw based rom have all spen functionality in them, most of them just include minor tweek, kernels and debloated. Other then that most functionality remains the same.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

ckavvouras said:
Most tw based rom have all spen functionality in them, most of them just include minor tweek, kernels and debloated. Other then that most functionality remains the same.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats cool, thanks. I was never sure that that existed (I've never owned a non-nexus device). Does the problem with dev-ability with Exynos devices also exist with TW ROMs? Or can the devs just tweak the stock image of the device?

Exynos to improve
ckavvouras said:
So from the benchmarks I have seen online for the note 3 it looks like the exynos versions of the device is slightly faster not by much. I am happy to see the exynos wifi version will at least be able to keep up with the snap dragon version.
First photo is the exynos variant with a score of 34546
The second photo is the snapdragon variant with a score of 33814
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is another reason to get the Exynos over the snapdragon. It will use all 8 cores at one very soon.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/09/samsungs-exynos-5-octa-hmp/
What do you think the benchmarks will look like after the change in software!

The_Maverick said:
Thats cool, thanks. I was never sure that that existed (I've never owned a non-nexus device). Does the problem with dev-ability with Exynos devices also exist with TW ROMs? Or can the devs just tweak the stock image of the device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure how they have done it in the past but overall they have released very stable and roms that preform better then stock in some benchmarks
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

in terms of CPU both are fairly close, what i'm interested in is GPU, so far the Adreno 330 is advancing on the Mali T628, but that's on 1080P 5.7" screen, maybe that will change with 10.1" 2560x1600 screen

Mashari_F said:
in terms of CPU both are fairly close, what i'm interested in is GPU, so far the Adreno 330 is advancing on the Mali T628, but that's on 1080P 5.7" screen, maybe that will change with 10.1" 2560x1600 screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I don't think screen size really matter it's more how many pixels need to be pushed. Pound for pound I think the adreno will do better when it comes down to it but I'm glad to see overall performance is about the same. I have no doubt that both devices will have no problem chewing and spitting out any of the most recent games.
Sent from my SGH-I317M using xda app-developers app

I own two Exynos devices the galaxy 7.7 and note 2 both have had their respective source code released. Where do people come off thinking Samsung is not forthcoming about the Exynos chips?

it's not the source code that anyone's worried about, but the fuse burning. once the fuse is blown the bootloader becomes locked. it takes a lot more work to root and pretty much impossible to install a custom recovery without having to possibly do a hardware mod.

madsquabbles said:
it's not the source code that anyone's worried about, but the fuse burning. once the fuse is blown the bootloader becomes locked. it takes a lot more work to root and pretty much impossible to install a custom recovery without having to possibly do a hardware mod.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link to this issue? Never heard of a bootloader having a "fuse."

Diogenes5 said:
Link to this issue? Never heard of a bootloader having a "fuse."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe its called an eFuse.

Just a heads up having all 8 cores running at the same time sounds good but may have heat issues
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app

it's happened to the verizon s4 with the latest firmware update. i beleive someone said the verizon s3 had it done, but some one got a leaked signed code to get around the blown fuse.

CM based builds for N900

I am having few doubts regarding N9000.
N9000 is having exynos and other variants have snapdragon processor.SO why there is difference in processors for same vairant.Is snapdragon more powerful than exynos?
Also I am seeing a different thread for exynos note 3, why we are having different thread?Does it means that builds available in other treads are not meant for this device??
I am also not able to see any CM builds available for N9000 , any idea about that?

Both the chips are very powerful. According to some benchmarks they have similar score. The beauty of snapdragon processor is that it is capable of shooting 4k videos which exynos cant do.I guess snapdragon also supports LTE and that makes it different. The reason why there are no CM rom for N900 is because samsung hasn't released its source for CM team to work. Be patient. Its up to CM to decide wether to work on this model or not.
The roms from N9005 will not work with N900.
Sent from my SM-N900 using xda app-developers app

Amitds360 said:
Both the chips are very powerful. According to some benchmarks they have similar score. The beauty of snapdragon processor is that it is capable of shooting 4k videos which exynos cant do.I guess snapdragon also supports LTE and that makes it different. The reason why there are no CM rom for N900 is because samsung hasn't released its source for CM team to work. Be patient. Its up to CM to decide wether to work on this model or not.
The roms from N9005 will not work with N900.
Sent from my SM-N900 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung realesed some source codes I know. Because of that some kernels compiled and distributed in Exynos section.
What do you mean "hasn't released its source" ? Samsung distributed source codes to N9005 and didn't dist. to N900. Why?
I don't understand.
I suppose to N900 doesn't owned by any people who is capable being contributor on CM.
Would you like to inform about the codes?
Sincerely.

tkaragoz said:
Samsung realesed some source codes I know. Because of that some kernels compiled and distributed in Exynos section.
What do you mean "hasn't released its source" ? Samsung distributed source codes to N9005 and didn't dist. to N900. Why?
I don't understand.
I suppose to N900 doesn't owned by any people who is capable being contributor on CM.
Would you like to inform about the codes?
Sincerely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Qualcomm source has to be released under the open source agreement as it's not Samsung's software/hardware. -- With the Exynos source it's Samsungs own software/hardware therefore they don't have to release all or any of it to anyone.

Any chance of getting these CM builds for N900??? Its being long time now..

It'll be longer yet.. CM not even started on the source.. And that's assuming they have it.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app