Related
I am currently a G1 owner on the fence about rooting my phone, as are many others. One of the first issues I've come across is being overwhelmed by forum threads. Unless I have missed something (and if I did, please point me in the right direction!), everything is posted in forums here, requiring people to pour through tons of posts and pick through the right information.
Is there an official wiki or something where all the latest news, guides, FAQs, etc. are being updated? If not, I'd love to start one, but unfortunately I don't have the knowledge to do so (yet, at least). I'm thinking of a super simple, jargon-free site for users to find answers to their questions, and a simple outlined "official" process for how to begin and where to go from there.
For example, some FAQs..
Can T-Mobile/Google "cut me off" in any way if they determine I have rooted my phone?
If I change my mind later, can I go back to original firmware and leave no trace that I ever rooted the phone in the first place? Future over-the-air updates will install with no issues?
Let's say I mess up during the rooting process. Is there always a way out, or am I screwed?
How safe is storing apps on the SD card? What can happen to my phone, and how do I avoid problems?
What are the JFvX.XX firmware releases? How do they work? Are they required? Are there other alternatives?
What if a future OTA can't be hacked, will we miss out on features?
I've seen various different methods of rooting the G1, which one is the most popular and why?
etc.
This is just an idea, but there's all these questions like this that I know many people have. While these questions can easily be answered in forums, I'm looking for a more convenient solution for the community. As official answers are nailed down, it would be great to have a reference to check with rather than flooding forums with questions.
Anyway, thanks for all the hard work from the developers here. It's really exciting to follow, and I can't wait to see what the future holds for the G1!
they have one:
http://wiki.xda-developers.com/index.php?pagename=HTC_Dream
look first
kay11224 said:
they have one:
http://wiki.xda-developers.com/index.php?pagename=HTC_Dream
look first
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link, but unfortunately this doesn't seem user friendly (it's filled with unexplained links and jargon), and seems pretty outdated. I'm thinking about info aimed the average n00b end-user here, not developers or people actively following the forums and progress made.
I'm not sure if you understand fully what you're asking. Keeping your phone updated without "actively following the forums and progress made" is a simple task right now, just wait until Google pushes an update for you. If using the search function is too hard for you, I think root access is biting off more than you can chew. All of your FAQ's can easily be found in the development section of the forums. As far as step by step guides are concerned, read the stickies, use the search function, and then ask. It's not complicated at all.
dudinatrix said:
Can T-Mobile/Google "cut me off" in any way if they determine I have rooted my phone?
If I change my mind later, can I go back to original firmware and leave no trace that I ever rooted the phone in the first place? Future over-the-air updates will install with no issues?
Let's say I mess up during the rooting process. Is there always a way out, or am I screwed?
How safe is storing apps on the SD card? What can happen to my phone, and how do I avoid problems?
What are the JFvX.XX firmware releases? How do they work? Are they required? Are there other alternatives?
What if a future OTA can't be hacked, will we miss out on features?
I've seen various different methods of rooting the G1, which one is the most popular and why?
etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) as far as i'm aware no. They can remove apps from peoples phones (allegedly) but i can't see how they would know you have root, or even care. It's good publicity for the phone if anything.
2) Yup, you can easily un-root your phone and the updates should work correctly.
3) Once you have the hardSPL bootloader loaded it's pretty much impossible to brick your phone, see this thread for details.
4) Not sure about this, so i can't comment
5) the JF firmware releases are essentially hacked firmwares, created by JesusFreke, that allow us to get root access (among other things ). they are incredibly easy to install and they are required for certain things such as, multi-touch. as far as i know, there are no alternatives.
6) They will be as everything is open source. I imagine xda will have a firmware hacked within hours of it's release
7) personally, i find this way the best. nice n simple and easy to follow.
have fun
Iceucold said:
I'm not sure if you understand fully what you're asking. Keeping your phone updated without "actively following the forums and progress made" is a simple task right now, just wait until Google pushes an update for you. If using the search function is too hard for you, I think root access is biting off more than you can chew. All of your FAQ's can easily be found in the development section of the forums. As far as step by step guides are concerned, read the stickies, use the search function, and then ask. It's not complicated at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am perfectly capable of handling root access. I am a Linux system administrator (among other things) by profession. I admit, this would be my first attempt at "hacking" a device and thus voiding the warranty, hence my hesitation and "noob" questions. Using the search function is not my concern here, but I can appreciate where you're coming from.
What I'm talking about, and what appears to be misinterpreted, is an information source for common end users, not developers or tech-savy users. If I have questions about rooting the G1, certainly those less technically inclined do as well. And unfortunately for them, they don't necessarily even know where to begin looking. I'm talking about people like my brother in law, for example... who probably never used a forum in his life, but wants to have multi-touch on his phone, or change his themes, or find a solution to his constant "low storage" warnings. People like him don't care about hacking into the phone and getting all this flexible access for himself. They just want to take advantage of what's already been achieved, but unfortunately require root to do so.
I agree that it is pretty simple to root the phone, but face it you have to be somewhat comfortable with technology first, even just to obtain the information.
Perhaps now isn't the appropriate time to wrap things up in a bow and give to the general G1 user base in a tidy little easy-to-digest package. As things develop further it may just naturally come about, perhaps via installers or something. I just think it would be helpful to many to have a source written for the common folk with jargon-free information... considering the more people get their hands on it, the more successful the platform can become.
And to Metlus, thanks for being receptive and answering my questions kindly without making me feel judged for asking what I assume many think is a "just search for it" type of post.
Meltus said:
1) as far as i'm aware no. They can remove apps from peoples phones (allegedly) but i can't see how they would know you have root, or even care. It's good publicity for the phone if anything.
2) Yup, you can easily un-root your phone and the updates should work correctly.
3) Once you have the hardSPL bootloader loaded it's pretty much impossible to brick your phone, see this thread for details.
4) Not sure about this, so i can't comment
5) the JF firmware releases are essentially hacked firmwares, created by JesusFreke, that allow us to get root access (among other things ). they are incredibly easy to install and they are required for certain things such as, multi-touch. as far as i know, there are no alternatives.
6) They will be as everything is open source. I imagine xda will have a firmware hacked within hours of it's release
7) personally, i find this way the best. nice n simple and easy to follow.
have fun
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post meltus!
If and when you do decide to root g1 take your time and breathe, really isn't too hard just nerve racking the first time. I did it and im not a pro at all so you will probably breeze through it! The advancements made so far are unreal, auto browser, themes and many more make rooting well worth it in my opinion
I'm not sure if it gets any easier than this, but gizmodo today posted what looks like the easiest "recipe" yet for rooting the G1:
How To: Hack Android For Multitouch Web Browsing on the T-Mobile G1
I really don't want this to come across wrong, but I just have to say it.
Developers, I appreciate all your hard work. I understand this is all beta/test/etc. I understand it is free of cost, even to those who did donate to one dev or another. You do it because you want to, not because you have to.
But please, for the love of all that's good - keep an updated list of Known Issues!
It sucks having to read 50 pages of posts to try to figure out if a particular release is reliable or not, to find out if there's a key feature broken or buggy. What makes it worse is you can't tell when reading these threads which users are on which release, because many still post issues after they've been resolved. Others post things that aren't really "issues" but user error.
You know what your issues are, you read the threads and you fix the issues. But trying to find a decent rom to flash is very, very difficult when your OP says "No known problems" and the thread that follows show that to be very untrue. It generates a lot of extra posts with people posting things you already know about, and it generates a lot of bad will when someone flashes something only to find that there are a number of game breaking issues.
All it takes is to update a post, say #2, in your thread, with KNOWN ISSUES. Once you confirm a bug, whether you intend to fix it on your next release or not, add it to that thread. It helps you, as a dev keep track of the bug, and it helps potential downloaders know what bugs have been confirmed and make an educated decision as to whether they want to install your release.
Hiding known issues is something I don't think anyone does intentionally, but it feels that way sometimes. It feels like devs are in a popularity contest, and any admission of flaws in their particular ROM is a weakness. Well, to tell the truth, I and many others are sick of installing something that was CLAIMED to be working perfectly, only to have glaring problems that have been there for many versions.
For a civil and productive development community. Please. Be honest with your known issues. It will go a long way in building trust with the people who you're providing ROMs to, and will mean fewer posts for YOU to wade through of users reporting known issues, without having read 500 posts first.
I have a hard time believing that most devs actively hide them. Most of the time it's probably just a bit of laziness. But, yes, it would be helpful when comparing roms if the descriptions had a well-maintained list of active bugs.
Since the developers here are NOT getting paid (NO your $20 donation is not sh*t for the time it takes to make one of these roms), yes WE will have to bear the brunt of testing these roms out and letting them know what bugs if any are in them
The other issue is the people flashing these roms, coming from Eugene's to Whiskey to the ASOP roms may generate some ghosts in the software that the developers cannot duplicate themselves. I know that when I went with the TW 2.2 roms I had plenty of issues, more issues than I have had even when I was stock. Odining back to stock and reflashing the 4.2 TW fixed ALL my problems. Dont know what caused it but since I have flashed a couple of roms prior to that (no problems), I will assume there were some ghosts in my system. This is an example that unless a TW team member is holding MY phone and working on it, they may not be able to duplicate
They don't care to list them. It's beneath some of them.
Maybe AirBus should list "midair exploding engines" as a known issue too...
kponti said:
Since the developers here are NOT getting paid (NO your $20 donation is not sh*t for the time it takes to make one of these roms), yes WE will have to bear the brunt of testing these roms out and letting them know what bugs if any are in them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. Hell, at work I run a $100,000.00+ software suite and even that company won't do what the OP suggests!
If you have a problem with them stop using their roms go back to stock and see how much better theirs is even with a few bugs, not one of you has any right to complain. They do damn good work for free with some donations that do not come close to what they should be paid for it but they do not whine at all.
The problem I find is the "spammy" and useless comments average and pretentious users make which is both hard for the developer and the end user to read the threads. A dev releases a ROM and there is a guaranteed "Oh I can't wait to flash this" comment that will pop up. And there are some issues that are minor and are sometimes not related to the release that are posted and some pretentious loser who extends his ego by trying to make simple matters complicated. This forum didn't much of this problem before and I could quickly flash ROMs easily since I could clearly grasp the status on the ROM project.
I wish they would start a new thread with new releases. It's a pain to try to read through a 500 page thread, and you comments about this or that, and you have no idea which version the person is talking about. I gave up on custom roms and just using the leaked tmo 2.2, thanks for that Eugene
kponti said:
Since the developers here are NOT getting paid (NO your $20 donation is not sh*t for the time it takes to make one of these roms), yes WE will have to bear the brunt of testing these roms out and letting them know what bugs if any are in them
The other issue is the people flashing these roms, coming from Eugene's to Whiskey to the ASOP roms may generate some ghosts in the software that the developers cannot duplicate themselves. I know that when I went with the TW 2.2 roms I had plenty of issues, more issues than I have had even when I was stock. Odining back to stock and reflashing the 4.2 TW fixed ALL my problems. Dont know what caused it but since I have flashed a couple of roms prior to that (no problems), I will assume there were some ghosts in my system. This is an example that unless a TW team member is holding MY phone and working on it, they may not be able to duplicate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A $20 donation is not worth the risk of bricking a $550 phone just because they got "lazy" and didn't notify donators/downloaders of [a] potentially show-stopping issue.
Posted a new Thread in Dev section for the purpose of reporting issues. So if you have an issue please shoot it to me and I will post it in that thread.
Update: Here is the link for the WIKI page.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=Samsung_Galaxy_S_SGH-T959#ROMs
swehes said:
Posted a new Thread in Dev section for the purpose of reporting issues. So if you have an issue please shoot it to me and I will post it in that thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are in a heap of trouble, a lot of people don't read, and you are gonna get 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 repeats of the same issue.
"OMG! MY SD CAR DONES"T MOUNT< HELP ME!11!!111"
chui101 said:
I have a hard time believing that most devs actively hide them. Most of the time it's probably just a bit of laziness. But, yes, it would be helpful when comparing roms if the descriptions had a well-maintained list of active bugs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue here is really that a forum is not the ideal place to manage software releases. A list of bugs emerges from community testing, but there's nowhere to "post" that list of issues, or attach it to a specific release. Since there's no way for the community to add such documentation, it falls on the ROM builder, who probably has other priorities.
This kind of project could be well served by using a real software project management software solution, such as say google code, which has an issue tracker and other useful features. But XDA does already give us a better tool than the forum - the XDA wiki!
I wish people would use the XDA wiki more extensively. This would be a good place to keep updated documentation such as this, without requiring the OP to keep a forum post updated with the latest findings. All the OP needs to do is link to the wiki page, and other people can help maintain it.
OK. Looking into Google Code.
(Update) So looking into the Google Code. What Licensing agreement are the ROMs under? Is it GPL v2 or v3 or another license?
swehes said:
OK. Looking into Google Code.
(Update) So looking into the Google Code. What Licensing agreement are the ROMs under? Is it GPL v2 or v3 or another license?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the project. The Linux kernel is GPLv2, so any kernels fall under that license. AOSP as a whole uses both GPL and apache code.
The issue with ROMs is that unless they're AOSP derived (like cyanogenmod) they often include binaries for which the license situation is murky at best, so google code isn't really an ideal fit for a "ROM" that's only ever released as a binary.
Really I was throwing google code out there as a well known example, there are tons of other ways to track issues. There are dedicated issue tracking systems such as trac, bugzilla, etc, but they require hosting. Most of the freely available hosted services require that you're running an open source project, which isn't necessarily true for the ROMs here.
IMO a serious project could very well benefit from such tools, but just using an XDA wiki page which community members can freely update is a great first step.
So looked into the Wiki for the Vibrant and have updated some information. Let me know what you guys think. Is this the way to go?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=Samsung_Galaxy_S_SGH-T959#ROMs
swehes said:
So looked into the Wiki for the Vibrant and have updated some information. Let me know what you guys think. Is this the way to go?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=Samsung_Galaxy_S_SGH-T959#ROMs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to be the "Spelling Nazi", and I am not even sure if you can change it, but it is "Kernel" not "Kernal". Also, the Dev on Team Whiskey is Sombionix, not Symbionix.
Otherwise, that looks like a great idea, and possible way of tracking things!
EDIT - I guess I could go ahead and make those tweaks, with it being a wiki and all couldn't I....
EDIT EDIT - Fixed it.
Stargazer3777 said:
Not to be the "Spelling Nazi", and I am not even sure if you can change it, but it is "Kernel" not "Kernal". Also, the Dev on Team Whiskey is Sombionix, not Symbionix.
Otherwise, that looks like a great idea, and possible way of tracking things!
EDIT - I guess I could go ahead and make those tweaks, with it being a wiki and all couldn't I....
EDIT EDIT - Fixed it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. On both accounts.
Maybe this should be a post to Microsoft
To quote "there are known, unknowns and unknown, knowns and and even sometimes unknown,unknowns............but.........
Developers ----develop they do not become a bookkeeper of their development.........that is coordinating work...........good luck getting any developer in ANY Specialty to do that............. reporting bugs........
---Maybe this should be a post to Microsoft---
N8ter said:
A $20 donation is not worth the risk of bricking a $550 phone just because they got "lazy" and didn't notify donators/downloaders of [a] potentially show-stopping issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have yet to see a REAL (completely dead) "bricked" vibrant from flashing a released Rom alone. I have seen a lot of user error cause boot loops or "soft-bricks" & HWL phones become unflashable because the end user didn't take the time to research though. As far as devs being "lazy" I dont really see that when the developer is coming here for us to tell him what else we find wrong. They are coding, you flash, you report back with a logcat. This is how development is made to my understanding. If ppl are to lazy to JUST do this then why shouldn't the developer discount long winded post or something they are not experiencing? If they know there is a bug its in the OP.
If you guys can change the interwebz & how 500 post per update are made completely useless please feel free to do so....
swehes said:
So looked into the Wiki for the Vibrant and have updated some information. Let me know what you guys think. Is this the way to go?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=Samsung_Galaxy_S_SGH-T959#ROMs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's a pretty awesome start for sure
As a matter of personal taste, I think having an individual wiki page per ROM (with the known issues and other detailed info) might be nice, although I'm not sure what the policy on new pages is with the XDA wiki.
Speaking from professional experience, the most challenging aspect of any documentation system is always convincing people to use it. It's great to compile the information, but unless ROM builders and devs post a link to the wiki in the forum threads nobody will ever see it. Having good, community based documentation is a benefit to everybody though, so hopefully people will recognize the utility of it and encourage its growth!
Just putting it out there that I would love to be a tester for the Galaxy SII, I have the original one, I have flash and went through 90% of every ROM up for it in both sections the original section and regular section, I just love flashing and going through Roms and would love to just help out someone with there Rom and do whatever it is they need me to do as far as testing, please hit me back. I hope I posted this is the right place if not, I will watch the Noob video 20 times in a row for punishment.
ah ok...... that's an idea
Original SGS II ? No kidding! :|
At first, I thought of this as just a pointless thread - but you got me thinking... What if we were to create a thread where people can nominate themselves as alpha/beta/etc. testers for ROM/Kernel developers? The difference lying in that to be eligible for a position, you'd have to prove that you have basic knowledge of how to recover from, for example, a bootloop, or a device that won't even boot, or constant FCs, etc. etc., along with again, pretty basic ADB knowledge, how to create and restore a NANDroid backup, and things like that. It'd come with the usual disclaimer stating that all responsibilities lie with the user, not the developer, and while the developer may be willing to provide support for bugs, etc., they are not liable for any damage resulting either directly or indirectly from the use of their software.
This would solve two things - it would satisfy those who just can't stand to wait for the release of something, who like to always live on the bleeding edge of development, and it would provide the developers a huge testing platform.
In review, though, this provides to main issues: 1) people would only be able to test one thing at a time, e.g. you're not going to be allowed to test a beta ROM with an alpha kernel, for example - it creates too many variables, and makes it harder for the developers to isolate and fix problems - but this shouldn't be an issue for people, just pick what you want and stick with it, and 2) people who leak the otherwise tester-restricted software for the masses - but this can be solved easily: maintain a list of official testers. Anyone who comes begging for support because they went ahead and flashed some leaked ROM/kernel/whatever, and ended up without a working device without being on the list, can be denied support for breaking the rules. Moreover, they, along with the leaker, could potentially face site-imposed bans?
I'll cut the rambling here, but I think it's a good idea?
As a ROM developer, its a great idea.
Sent from HydrOG3N MOD S2.
Technology Evolves, Android Evolves.
HydrOG3N is THE Revolution.
Thinking about it, not bad idea. But to back sceamworks up a bit, there should be a number of post limit, Some form of history for the dev`s to see who is a Noob (sorry Noobs) and who is not...
I'm in
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
I like the idea and I too would be glad to help people testing there ROMs.
It also seems nice to have a thread where people (like me or the OP) can set them self available for testing.
Most real developers pick their team from watching the threads and see how is willing to put the time in and know how to properly test as well as offer ideas on fixes. But not a bad idea I guess for new rom developers
lodger said:
Thinking about it, not bad idea. But to back sceamworks up a bit, there should be a number of post limit, Some form of history for the dev`s to see who is a Noob (sorry Noobs) and who is not...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree completely, I'd say 50-100 would be a fair starting point? I might PM some devs sometime soon with a proper proposal, and if I get a positive response from a majority of them, I might draft something, and get some official names on-board.
zelendel said:
Most real developers pick their team from watching the threads and see how is willing to put the time in and know how to properly test as well as offer ideas on fixes. But not a bad idea I guess for new rom developers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I considered this, and I think if anything brings the idea down, it'll be that - it's a hard sell to make, and I'd love to say that there's no harm in trying, but really, there is, so I guess execution is everything?
Good idea, im in....
Hello everyone,
most of you probably don't know me since I did not develop for Samsung devices for quite some time now.
I would be interested in aiding the Exynos 5420 development scene (in particular on the Galaxy Note 10.1) and prepare a custom Android distribution for it (Team EOS 5.0 - Lollipop).
I can get all the required drivers and binaries I need for development, since most of it is open source luckily.
And the Nexus 10 (manta) can still be used as reference for many things.
All I need is a development device to debug on.
It is particularly important that this is the Galaxy Note 10.1 EXYNOS (WiFi-only variant), and not the LTE (Qualcomm) variant.
I created this thread to ask whether someone has a spare device lying around, maybe because of the little development on Exynos 5 devices, or if people would be willing to donate a device (I'm a university student and unfortunately can not afford the full price for a new device. I'm willing to dive into the Exynos development scene and spend time on this device though, including extensive debugging).
You can leave a reply in this thread or contact me on gmail: [email protected]
I have a better idea. Sending device is a problem. But we can donate to you, and then u can purchase P600 or P601 on SWAPA or EBAY. not new but fully working
I would be glad to see working AOSP/MAHDI or other ROMs runnig on my P601
Yeah, that was the initial idea.
I would pay any shipping costs or parts of a device (a used one is perfectly fine).
The issue I see is that probably not enough people willing to donate enough small amounts of money, hence I asked if someone had a spare device I could buy or pay the shipping costs.
RaymanFX said:
Yeah, that was the initial idea.
I would pay any shipping costs or parts of a device (a used one is perfectly fine).
The issue I see is that probably not enough people willing to donate enough small amounts of money, hence I asked if someone had a spare device I could buy or pay the shipping costs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it would be better to ask for donations because there is not a lot of people here although it would be hard. There have been previous instances where at least 2 different devs raised donations for this device before stopping development shortly after so people do have some trust issues. It would take a while but i'm sure people would donate considering you are offering an AOSP experience. If you renamed this thread to something like: Donations needed for new device- AOSP rom development. Then it would catch a lot of eyes because that's what a lot of people want The question remains whether people would actually donate. The average cost for you would be around 250-300 euros I think. That means you would need around 28 people (10 each). Whatever way you decide to go down, I wish you luck and I look forward to any rom developments if you do manage to get the device :good:
You seem to have quite a respectable history (in both Rom & kernel developement), so I think getting enough donations should be doable (and I'd be willing to donate a few bucks myself)
But I do have a few questions:
1) What about warranty? Some devs who had collected donations for a (used) device, have bricked their devices -> no more developement
Therefore P600 owners might be scared / hard to convince
2) what exactly is "Team EOS 5.0" and what makes it different from other Roms? Would you perhaps consider developing other Roms / kernels as well? (like porting over PA for example?)
Or would you maybe consider becoming the official P600 CyanogenMod maintainer (since we don't have one, yet)? [<- I think this one would be reason enough to donate]
Last but not least:
You could ask one of the XDA members who managed the previous donation-collections for help (they have successfully done it before, so they might be able to do it again :fingers-crossed: )
PS: The Note 10.1 2014 is great for college, trust me - I'm a student, too . All you need is the Papyrus-App from the Play Store.
Thank you two for your reasonable thoughts.
I think the main reason why the previous developers stopped developing for this device rather quickly is the Exynos chip.
The main difference between me and anyone else is (or so I believe) the fact that I am especially interested in developing for the Exynos 5420 chip and the drivers for it (mainly from the Insignal forum source).
As far as bricked devices, I can say I had a Samsung device before, and as long as the bootloader is unlockable and access to ODIN (The firmware flashing tool) is granted, a hard brick is rather hard to achieve. I see little risk here, and I assume my previous development experience will prevent me from making major mistakes in that regard.
A new device would cost me approximately 350€, so if we could collect about 300$ with donations (which would equal something like 270€), I'd pay the remaining costs.
People are of course free to check my development history and/or references first and see if they think I would benefit the aosp development scene for this device.
The ROM I mentioned (Team EOS 5.0 lollipop) is essentially AOSP 5.0 with selected features that we code ourselves, like EOS Weather, or the NX gesture interface.
If people however see the need for an official CM maintainer, I'd be happy to become this as well, all I need is a device to debug and develop on, I'd be willing to spend the time to officially maintain this device.
Other developers and/or contributors should also expect support from me in areas of kernel development or AOSP custom ROM development. I believe in 'sharing is caring', so all my knowledge and achievements on this device shall benefit the community.
If some of you could maybe contact the people who raised donations before, I'd be thankful and gratious for the support. All donations will be listed here and the whole process shall be as transparent as possible.
RaymanFX said:
Thank you two for your reasonable thoughts.
I think the main reason why the previous developers stopped developing for this device rather quickly is the Exynos chip.
The main difference between me and anyone else is (or so I believe) the fact that I am especially interested in developing for the Exynos 5420 chip and the drivers for it (mainly from the Insignal forum source).
As far as bricked devices, I can say I had a Samsung device before, and as long as the bootloader is unlockable and access to ODIN (The firmware flashing tool) is granted, a hard brick is rather hard to achieve. I see little risk here, and I assume my previous development experience will prevent me from making major mistakes in that regard.
A new device would cost me approximately 350€, so if we could collect about 300$ with donations (which would equal something like 270€), I'd pay the remaining costs.
People are of course free to check my development history and/or references first and see if they think I would benefit the aosp development scene for this device.
The ROM I mentioned (Team EOS 5.0 lollipop) is essentially AOSP 5.0 with selected features that we code ourselves, like EOS Weather, or the NX gesture interface.
If people however see the need for an official CM maintainer, I'd be happy to become this as well, all I need is a device to debug and develop on, I'd be willing to spend the time to officially maintain this device.
Other developers and/or contributors should also expect support from me in areas of kernel development or AOSP custom ROM development. I believe in 'sharing is caring', so all my knowledge and achievements on this device shall benefit the community.
If some of you could maybe contact the people who raised donations before, I'd be thankful and gratious for the support. All donations will be listed here and the whole process shall be as transparent as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi. Here's the most recent donation thread which was successful :good:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2742793
I don't see why another thread is needed though. I don't mind opening one up for you but you might as well use this one if you just rename it and state your intentions in the op.
22sl22 said:
Hi. Here's the most recent donation thread which was successful :good:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2742793
I don't see why another thread is needed though. I don't mind opening one up for you but you might as well use this one if you just rename it and state your intentions in the op.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, so if maybe one of you guys, with good contact to the community, could open a new donatiion thread to collect the ~300$, I'd be grateful.
Or maybe @drrasii could chime in here and edit his first donation thread and link here as a reference to let people know what I want to do.
As I said above, I'd be willing to become the official CM maintainer, or if CM refuses to accept this for some reason, I'd host the needed sources for the device on my personal GitHub and keep it updated so people can build whatever ROM they want.
Of course, the first goal would be to get Lollipop running on this tablet, which I'd start with as soon as the device is ordered/has arrived.
Hey guys. That donation thread I started a while ago was on a whim cause I wanted Hyperdrive by sbreen on my Note. Was lucky enough to have him commit and get enough people chipping in for the tablet which was met with success. I'm by no means a great organizer or somebody with tight connections here on XDA . Probably would be best if someone who wanted to head it up would start a new thread stating the case.
Best of luck!
RaymanFX said:
Okay, so if maybe one of you guys, with good contact to the community, could open a new donatiion thread to collect the ~300$, I'd be grateful.
Or maybe @drrasii could chime in here and edit his first donation thread and link here as a reference to let people know what I want to do.
As I said above, I'd be willing to become the official CM maintainer, or if CM refuses to accept this for some reason, I'd host the needed sources for the device on my personal GitHub and keep it updated so people can build whatever ROM they want.
Of course, the first goal would be to get Lollipop running on this tablet, which I'd start with as soon as the device is ordered/has arrived.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the quick answer.
Could one of you guys (@22sl22 or @r4yN) then open a new donation thread and explain a bit about this thread and my plans?
If we manage to handle this process rather quickly, people should be able to enjoy L on this tablet soon hopefully.
RaymanFX said:
Thanks for the quick answer.
Could one of you guys (@22sl22 or @r4yN) then open a new donation thread and explain a bit about this thread and my plans?
If we manage to handle this process rather quickly, people should be able to enjoy L on this tablet soon hopefully.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, i'll open one now :good:
I'll also post a message in here after the new thread has been created so that people know http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-note-10-2014/general/rumours-plans-to-android-5-0-t2861225
EDIT: before I open the thread, how much do you actually need? $300 is about 240 Euros, not 270 so we will need a bit more, say $350, would that be OK?
Thank you very much.
Actually, 300$ (240$) is enough, I'd be willing to pay the other 100€ myself if it needs to be.
I want to get started rather quickly and have L running on this device, so I'd order the device as soon as the 300$ are collected.
Why a P600 model and not the P601 model?
The p601 to develop is exactly the same from p600 plus the phone side.
Sent from my SM-P601 using XDA Free mobile app
Why the delay? Here are the first 10 €!
RaymanFX said:
Thank you very much.
Actually, 300$ (240$) is enough, I'd be willing to pay the other 100€ myself if it needs to be.
I want to get started rather quickly and have L running on this device, so I'd order the device as soon as the 300$ are collected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi RaymanFX!
Glad to see that a real dev wants to take our device and port CM11 for us.
I do not make many words, but simply push the first $ 12.12 to you.
That's the current rates for 10, -€.
Hope it works as good as for sbreen (dev from HyperdriveRom) and many people jumps like lemmings behind me. :good: Haha!
Hope also we get the money quickly together and will try to continue to encourage people to make a small donation.
10,-€
Transaktionscode:
7R473626855605042
You also get a short pm
Hey RaymanFX, excited for asop 5.0 but curious about some of the stock features that make this tablet. Is there any way to preserve multi window support or s-pen features ?
I upgraded to BOG5 but found unable to downgrade and root.
Can anyone help me solve this peoblem
I would be very grateful
a133232 said:
I upgraded to BOG5 but found unable to downgrade and root.
Can anyone help me solve this peoblem
I would be very grateful
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No one can help you solve this problem. BOG5 cannot be downgraded and it cannot be rooted. Period. End of story.
landshark68 said:
No one can help you solve this problem. BOG5 cannot be downgraded and it cannot be rooted. Period. End of story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's always JTAG...right?
dreamwave said:
There's always JTAG...right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please stop misinforming new people. I told you why JTAG wouldn't work before you even made your lengthy JTAG "brick" thread (which you referred back to your other nonsensical "petition" thread - the exact thread where I answered you WHY JTAG wouldn't work - in the end because you have absolutely no idea what you're doing).
Just remove this thread already. Or sticky it so there's a chance people will read it and never ask this stupid question again...
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Spartan117H3 said:
Please stop misinforming new people. I told you why JTAG wouldn't work before you even made your lengthy JTAG "brick" thread (which you referred back to your other nonsensical "petition" thread - the exact thread where I answered you WHY JTAG wouldn't work - in the end because you have absolutely no idea what you're doing).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you reply in those words? I didn't get any of that out of what you said, unfortunately. Also, on the topic of the "petition" it was mainly to try and inform at least a couple more people and possibly gain a couple more arguments that could be used against Verizon through the FCC. I have a valid legal argument, one that you were being pessimistic about with really no backing, and on the JTAG issue...you didn't offer any reason why that was so, and so I didn't back down at the first sight of doubt. I don't mean to be defensive or aggressive in any way, but I respectfully took your opinion into account (and it was indeed an opinion on many of those matters), factored in the overall theme of posts you had made in the past, and decided that there was (and still is) possibility for solutions in each of these issues. Unless JTAG is specifically disabled at the hardware level (which was actually proven false by what I found and documented in my thread) it is still feasible to use it to modify the Qfuse flags.
dreamwave said:
Where did you reply in those words? I didn't get any of that out of what you said, unfortunately. Also, on the topic of the "petition" it was mainly to try and inform at least a couple more people and possibly gain a couple more arguments that could be used against Verizon through the FCC. I have a valid legal argument, one that you were being pessimistic about with really no backing, and on the JTAG issue...you didn't offer any reason why that was so, and so I didn't back down at the first sight of doubt. I don't mean to be defensive or aggressive in any way, but I respectfully took your opinion into account (and it was indeed an opinion on many of those matters), factored in the overall theme of posts you had made in the past, and decided that there was (and still is) possibility for solutions in each of these issues. Unless JTAG is specifically disabled at the hardware level (which was actually proven false by what I found and documented in my thread) it is still feasible to use it to modify the Qfuse flags.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For your petition, you keep saying, you have "valid" arguments. If you do, why do you need to keep continuing the thread? Go take it to court then. Start a class action lawsuit. You are correct, what I stated there is my opinion. Pessimistic about? You wrote so many pages for no reason. What does information do if you don't use it? All you were doing was talking about it. I was telling you why it doesn't work, and why Verizon doesn't have to respond to you, a single person, unless you were to take legal action against them, and even then, you are highly unlikely to win. By all means, take it to court. But know that talking doesn't change anything. If you want to argue that publicity is your motive, the 18k bounty got a thousand times more publicity, and the bootloader is STILL unlocked. There were also actual petition threads that people signed at change.com/etc, that have more "weight" than your thread, yet it is, again, locked still. I bet you the devs care more about a bootloader unlock than you do, because that's what most of their work/fun comes from. What did most of them do? Most (not all) of them jumped ship to Tmobile/international versions.
I took your opinion into account, but your legal backing to my eyes is simply, "Verizon must tell ME why/respond to MY claims as a sole person, not, Verizon has no basis for their argument (as I'm sure they have it somewhere, companies always try to hide their asses)." So like I said, go take it to court, by all means. I'm not being rude, I'm just saying, do something about it if you really believe what you think is right. It's also not pessimistic although you view it that way probably because it opposes your opinion, it's realistic and I've given you logical reasons why, whereas you just keep stating, Verizon has some obligation to respond to you.
As for the JTAG, I stated in one of the reasons why a bootloader unlock is not possible:
Spartan117H3 said:
...If you took the time to look at other threads ranging from the S3, Note 4, etc, you'll learn that the S5 isn't the only one. Also, the reason the Devs don't work on it is because a failed bootloader exploit bricks the phone so that not even a JTAG will revive it....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The devs already tried this. All you did was write a multi page post talking back and forth with yourself and new people who have no knowledgeable backing. Look back through your thread. The only support you had was from new people, you probably double posted more than their posts. I think only one senior member responded.
Spartan117H3 said:
For your petition...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do apologize for trying a method that I saw absolutely no documentation on any attempts of, it was a fool of me to try and see if it might just work. You said that JTAG would not work, you gave no links and no reasons why. I understand that there might be a kill flag in there, but if the phone believes itself to be running genuine software I don't see much in the way of proof that it wouldn't accept any firmware rewrite then, especially as at that point Samsung and Verizon would stand to benefit from being able to directly write such firmware. The petition was simply to get even just a couple more eyes on the issue, and with the FCC...IT ACTUALLY IS A LEGAL CASE. I have tried to say that, that they are given ,by forfeit of direct control of the issues by Congress and the courts, a requirement that they use internal systems that are run as courts and have the power of a court, while being only possible to challenge if they act "unconstitutionally" outside their given bounds. The petition was a thing I started basically to try and let people outside of the developer community, who are demographically very likely to be vocal on issues of corporate monopoly (based on the crowd change(dot)org attracts.
I tried doing my research for each, and in basic principle found none that matched either. No, I'm not a longstanding member of the XDA community, and no I'm not an ex-oem firmware dev, but if I have an idea and no one gives me a specific reason why it won't work in a manner that would both completely address all facets of it and in a way that would help others to try and build off of the information contained within, then I will try and implement that idea or publicize it so someone who knows how can do it. Notice, on my thread about the SD Card unlock: I completely summarized the content of my findings in the first post, dead ends I ran into, and what I personally think might work in the future. If someone adds to the thread with info that either adds or nullifies an idea then I will update it and tag the post as I care about knowledge on a whole and getting info to everyone who can use it. My rationale behind this is to allow for anyone who might have an idea, or the capability to form a successful one, to research and take into account the findings of others.
TL;DR: It helps everyone, individually and as a community, to explain why an idea won't work than just to declare that it won't and the person's efforts (all of them) are in vain.
I do not mean to insult you or attack you in any way, and I have no "but" or "however" for this statement. Just for the future, instead of saying "no" and then flaming me when I say "why not," maybe say "why not" because if you know that the answer is "no," not that many issues are so black and white that a small bit of explanation or detail physically can't be given.
BTW, in response to one of your replies in a recent thread where you mentioned how a brick would not be possible to undo even by JTAG then talked about that being universal, what I was discussing was not bricking by means of triggering any lock such as that that you mention. I was attempting to reproduce conditions that would lead to a "failed flash of newer software" wherein no flag is tripped, but the phone could not load any usable kernel, modem, or bootloader image as that would allow for using the method here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/verizon-galaxy-s5/help/g900v-hard-brick-t2914847 that I have really worked on for the s3 to try and boot custom software to flash software to the phone. I am actually still optimistic for one method here because no one has said that it would not boot a very carefully crafted debrick image that would act as an external bootstrap and directly load a completely custom system image quite readily with no qualifiers or signature checks.
And sorry to everyone for the long post, I know it's annoying. Please forgive me :fingers-crossed:
@dreamwave, I mentioned that they were found by researching other phones that have bootloaders locked. There is one phone (I forget which one) where they (I believe two developers) DID get a successful bootloader unlock, but because they bricked so many phones that a JTAG would not fix, they sold bootloader unlocks for $25 a pop to recoup costs for the loss. But it was the phone itself, not a carrier specific version of a bootloader unlock. Meaning that phone worked on all carriers. I know you said you wanted links or whatnot, but it's on 100% XDA, and I'm on my phone right now/don't remember where I read it.
I gave you sound logic of why your solutions do not work, and if you take the time to think about what I say, instead of referring back to your own original statement, you would understand why. That's the thing. I state the reason why, whether or not you follow along with it is entirely up to you. I did not flame you in any way, I always responded with reasons why. It's just like you said, you were promoting awareness for people who are legally sound. But nothing was done, yet you keep continuing/promoting the thread, to what end? You're not going to do anything yourself. So why beat the dead horse?
You're right. I don't have hard documentation of answers. But you act like this is the first phone that has been attempted to be bootloader unlocked. There are threads in other forums for other phones that have been tested. There's also a plethora of sound reasoning against what you're trying to do. Do you need scientific proof and factual documentation that wind exists, or can you tell it exists because you can feel it on your skin?
If I have time later/if you want, I can find the links to what I'm talking about or you can look yourself, but for what it's worth, the developers work together in private to deter people from asking nonsensical questions such as, is it done yet/etc. As I'm not a developer (I just looked up this stuff in my free time), I don't have access to your hard evidence. But it has been stated that what you tried has been done on multiple phones in the past. If me saying that, or me finding the quote of someone saying that isn't enough for you, then by all means, go try it yourself. Developers will not come forward to tell you their progress for the reason I mentioned, so if you're looking for that, you won't find it.
@Spartan117H3
That is certainly reasonably sound logic for the most part, and I understand that many of them do it in private, but if you knew about it, especially other than just "no it doesn't work" for a specific experiment, it would be great if you wrote where any roadblock would lay and maybe a reference to where I could learn more about it. I learned that a major roadblock to parts of that method are the self verification of the bootloader and the external signature check from the SoC itself. What I am hoping to do is see whether or not the signature check and the load file commands are separate or integrated. If they are integrated, then that's probably the end of trying to use the SD Card, but if they are separate then it should be possible to dynamically alter the contents of the card after the initial signature check. Of course it's possible that it doesn't do the same signature check for an external SD card, in which case just modifying it to act as a permanent bootstrap would be entirely feasible.
I know that a lot of people have tried and failed, but if no one has tried this one specifically to its full extent I'd like to go for it. Just someone telling me no doesn't show me that they know what they're talking about. Someone telling me no, and then offering a little bit of a clue why (even just saying they found somewhere where someone tried the method then ran into (blank) as an issue) definitely helps me to try and either find a different method or a way around that issue or roadblock.
Also, I remember you telling me JTAG wouldn't work, but never addressing the SD card method... I can't seem to find any of your posts on my thread, though (a few on the petition one, but mostly didn't recognize the FCC as the deciding body, instead stating justification on the part of Verizon.) The FCC decides what their regulations say and mean, just as the courts do, and require adherence to those interpretations. No standing precedent exists that stands on Verizon's side on this issue from the arguments presented so I'm going for it, and just letting everyone know how it's going and leaving it open to discussion and reply if they have an idea that I might pursue to help my case
@dreamwave, what you are asking is the same as what this guy was "trying" to ask:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/verizon-galaxy-s5/help/vz-replacement-s5-oe1-t3190365
And the third post by the moderator clarified. As we have already discussed, you don't have enough knowledge (nor do I for that matter) to successfully start and finish a solution. It's like, if we were to build a building with just a hammer and some dirt. Why don't we leave the building process to the engineers? If you actually do have enough knowledge, contact a developer to get into their private work. Otherwise, you'll leave a building unfinished, cluttering up the streets, so to speak.
Basically, you're asking for either A, someone to go along with you in whatever process you try to do (in which case, it would be easier and quicker for a dev to do it his/herself), or B, just to see where progress is, in which case, it is not useful to you nor I, because it's another "are we there yet" question, and we wouldn't be able to continue with it anyway.
You don't know if it has or hasn't been tried, but I'm sure it's been thought of. You are doing it for free of your own accord. You don't think devs would want that 18k bounty way back when? Like I said above, if you have the knowledge, by all means, contact a developer, prove your worth, and I'm sure he/she will let you into their work, with all their notes or whatnot of what they tried that worked/didn't work.
If the bootloader is locked, that means unsigned code is not allowed at the lowest level. Why would an SD card work, when it goes through the OS which goes through the bootloader? Your idea of a JTAG makes a tiny bit more sense than the SD card one, because JTAG is at low hardware level. I didn't bother posting in your thread, because I figured you'd do what you want to regardless of what people say.
I recognized the FCC argument. I don't have an answer against that, but I'm sure/assuming Verizon does. But my justification was, why does Verizon have to answer to you specifically. You don't have a case because you're not going to court with it.
Edit: I can't remember for the life of me where I read about this stuff, all I remember was searching for some very specific bootloader question (a month ago?) that I wanted to know the answer to. The person was describing why root is so easy to achieve compared to a bootloader unlock and said something along the lines of: for root, all you have to do is inject stuff into a rom and see if it sticks. For a bootloader exploit, a failed attempt bricks the phone so that not even a JTAG will salvage it.
The search also led me to a phone which I also don't remember, I believe it was something older, but two devs "charged" $25 per unlock to recover the costs of the phones they bricked.
It is similar to the HTC M9 where people buy expensive Java cards to unlock phones, and unlock them based on donations, but not the same. I'll keep looking to see if I can pull it up.
@dreamwave, Found it, it was actually the HTC M8, so I was close in my edit above. Note, this post also talks about failed bootloaders killing the phone. And note again the reason that counters your petition, but it has no "hard evidence" other than "some person" says it. But it makes logical sense, so it should be left as is (in my opinion, unless you have profound knowledge that says otherwise, because I know I don't). Verizon doesn't need to prove anything to anyone who isn't suing them, or who isn't causing red tape for them. It's a post by a recognized contributor quoting a moderator, the closest you'll get to what you want.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=54644576&postcount=10
The Java card that people are using do currently work for both the HTC M8 and M9, but are limited and expensive in comparison to the Sunshine exploit that they charge $25 for (look at the bottom of this post)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=54126788&postcount=359
This is all I can provide for you in terms of hard facts. It is the conclusion made on older phones, and applies even more so on newer/current ones. Hope this helps.
Spartan117H3 said:
@dreamwave, Found it, it was actually the HTC M8, so I was close in my edit above. Note, this post also talks about failed bootloaders killing the phone. And note again the reason that counters your petition, but it has no "hard evidence" other than "some person" says it. But it makes logical sense, so it should be left as is (in my opinion, unless you have profound knowledge that says otherwise, because I know I don't). Verizon doesn't need to prove anything to anyone who isn't suing them, or who isn't causing red tape for them. It's a post by a recognized contributor quoting a moderator, the closest you'll get to what you want.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=54644576&postcount=10
The Java card that people are using do currently work for both the HTC M8 and M9, but are limited and expensive in comparison to the Sunshine exploit that they charge $25 for (look at the bottom of this post)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=54126788&postcount=359
This is all I can provide for you in terms of hard facts. It is the conclusion made on older phones, and applies even more so on newer/current ones. Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, that helps a lot with the SD card thing and my idea there. As to the legal issue though, I disagree a bit with the person there, as though it is in Verizon's interest to keep locking them, well the letter of the law is the letter of the law...and I spoke to someone who isn't a lawyer by practice but did take the BAR exam, what they said was basically that "A lawsuit would be possible if I suffered damages, but wouldn't do much to their practices necessarily. Going through the FCC would involve two steps: a trial in which they will determine if a violation has occurred (my opinion is that one has occurred, and I posted as my last post on the JTAG unlock discussion thread my current arguments), and then a second trial in which remediatory actions/consequences will be decided. This would cover retroactive steps, which would likely include a system whereby a signed patch would be created, and customized (upon request to download) to respond to a specific IMEI/model number. This would allow for a corporation or licensing group to exclude a set of devices while allowing consumer versions to be unlocked. It really doesn't cost me anything to pursue this, and if it annoys Big Red and that's it, then so be it...I'm happy if it does Of course on the same note, Verizon hasn't specifically countered any of my statements/observations, and have really tried to exploit little technicalities such as footnotes 500 and 502 in the FCC auction release, but in each I was able to create responses that very directly opposed those in a way supported by a large amount of text in the release. I'm hoping it will work, even if I wouldn't bet a million bucks on it doing so.
dreamwave said:
Thanks, that helps a lot with the SD card thing and my idea there. As to the legal issue though, I disagree a bit with the person there, as though it is in Verizon's interest to keep locking them, well the letter of the law is the letter of the law...and I spoke to someone who isn't a lawyer by practice but did take the BAR exam, what they said was basically that "A lawsuit would be possible if I suffered damages, but wouldn't do much to their practices necessarily. Going through the FCC would involve two steps: a trial in which they will determine if a violation has occurred (my opinion is that one has occurred, and I posted as my last post on the JTAG unlock discussion thread my current arguments), and then a second trial in which remediatory actions/consequences will be decided. This would cover retroactive steps, which would likely include a system whereby a signed patch would be created, and customized (upon request to download) to respond to a specific IMEI/model number. This would allow for a corporation or licensing group to exclude a set of devices while allowing consumer versions to be unlocked. It really doesn't cost me anything to pursue this, and if it annoys Big Red and that's it, then so be it...I'm happy if it does Of course on the same note, Verizon hasn't specifically countered any of my statements/observations, and have really tried to exploit little technicalities such as footnotes 500 and 502 in the FCC auction release, but in each I was able to create responses that very directly opposed those in a way supported by a large amount of text in the release. I'm hoping it will work, even if I wouldn't bet a million bucks on it doing so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok. Except exchange/military is most likely a greater majority of customers than us who want it unlocked. Time is money. Verizon hasn't countered because you're not talking to them, you're talking in a thread. Good luck with your lawsuit.
Spartan117H3 said:
Ok. Except exchange/military is most likely a greater majority of customers than us who want it unlocked. Time is money. Verizon hasn't countered because you're not talking to them, you're talking in a thread. Good luck with your lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks (P.S.: I have an ongoing case through the FCC that's independent from XDA, a formal complaint directly to the FCC by methods they've provided)
dreamwave said:
Thanks (P.S.: I have an ongoing case through the FCC that's independent from XDA, a formal complaint directly to the FCC by methods they've provided)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this really what you choose to "Live Free or Die" about? Or do you have too many irons in the fire, and this is just the most annoying? People in New Hampshire have nothing better to do than to sue Verizon for something they have no chance of winning...
ldeveraux said:
Is this really what you choose to "Live Free or Die" about? Or do you have too many irons in the fire, and this is just the most annoying? People in New Hampshire have nothing better to do than to sue Verizon for something they have no chance of winning...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except I'm not suing them, I'm using the methods our gov't has already put in place specifically for occasions such as this. I'm not arguing damages, it's not a lawsuit, it's an FCC complaint...something really different that I think I've explained a couple times
P.S.: I have a lot more that I do, this doesn't take much of my time and as a high school student I basically consider stuff like this a hobby, and have you ever been to New Hampshire? I'm from the southern half of middle NH...not that many "gun wielding hicks" around these parts
I got the phone from a friend who dunked it in a lake and thought it was dead, I figured I'd try and get some use out of it and discovered the larger issue on the part of Verizon. Considering the number of people at my school who ask me to root their phone, being able to tell them "sure" and not ask if they use Verizon (most of them do) first would be really nice.
...this thread got really off topic didn't it
dreamwave said:
Except I'm not suing them, I'm using the methods our gov't has already put in place specifically for occasions such as this. I'm not arguing damages, it's not a lawsuit, it's an FCC complaint...something really different that I think I've explained a couple times
P.S.: I have a lot more that I do, this doesn't take much of my time and as a high school student I basically consider stuff like this a hobby, and have you ever been to New Hampshire? I'm from the southern half of middle NH...not that many "gun wielding hicks" around these parts
I got the phone from a friend who dunked it in a lake and thought it was dead, I figured I'd try and get some use out of it and discovered the larger issue on the part of Verizon. Considering the number of people at my school who ask me to root their phone, being able to tell them "sure" and not ask if they use Verizon (most of them do) first would be really nice.
...this thread got really off topic didn't it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
High school student... nevermind, kablock...
What do you mean?