Attention Note 7 ports! - Sprint Galaxy Note 4 General

If you are using any N7 port rom. You need to read below linked post.
This guy's imei was blacklisted because showing as Note 7. :crying:
This was on Nemesis rom but I'd beware on all N7 roms.
I came across this and wanted to share and inform you all.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=70078576&postcount=1053
Only thing i don't understand, i thought when a phone was produced, it is given a range of imei numbers. So these companies should be able to determine this isn't true Note 7.

aaron74 said:
If you are using any N7 port rom. You need to read below linked post.
This guy's imei was blacklisted because showing as Note 7. :crying:
This was on Nemesis rom but I'd beware on all N7 roms.
I came across this and wanted to share and inform you all.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=70078576&postcount=1053
Only thing i don't understand, i thought when a phone was produced, it is given a range of imei numbers. So these companies should be able to determine this isn't true Note 7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just asking
Can the developers of N7 ports deal with this issue?
My note 4 is all I have.
Can't afford to mess it up

natibongo said:
Just asking
Can the developers of N7 ports deal with this issue?
My note 4 is all I have.
Can't afford to mess it up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about the devs.
But these service providers and also samsung should be able to tell not to do this. They shouldn't just read 1 value (like ro.build.model) from build.prop to determine if it's a note 7. All they would need is a script to read a few hardware values to tell is not a true note 7. Plus i always thought your imei was coded to certain models. So no matter what rom you have, your imei will show as a note 4. That's what didn't make sense to me in that post.
But either way, i wanted to share it. So precautions could be taken.

aaron74 said:
If you are using any N7 port rom. You need to read below linked post.
This guy's imei was blacklisted because showing as Note 7. :crying:
This was on Nemesis rom but I'd beware on all N7 roms.
I came across this and wanted to share and inform you all.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=70078576&postcount=1053
Only thing i don't understand, i thought when a phone was produced, it is given a range of imei numbers. So these companies should be able to determine this isn't true Note 7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Considering that carriers are supposed to be able to block a single phone via IMEI (if that phone is stolen, for example), it stands to reason that they're supposed to be unique per phone - no two note 7s should have the same number, let alone two phones with different models
So if there's a custom rom out there that is changing everyone's IMEI to the same number, the blacklist in this case might not have anything to do with whether it's a Note 7 IMEI - using the same IMEI on two devices at the same time should raise red flags

styles420 said:
Considering that carriers are supposed to be able to block a single phone via IMEI (if that phone is stolen, for example), it stands to reason that they're supposed to be unique per phone - no two note 7s should have the same number, let alone two phones with different models
So if there's a custom rom out there that is changing everyone's IMEI to the same number, the blacklist in this case might not have anything to do with whether it's a Note 7 IMEI - using the same IMEI on two devices at the same time should raise red flags
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, kinda what i meant is, they shouldn't be turning off your phone because of build.prop properties showing as N7. It should all be done by imei.
But that post had me worried, cause he makes it sound like his phone was shut down just for having N7 port rom. Which should not be the case. Unless there's something going on there we don't know about (like changed imei)
Thanks for your input. Cause i was trying to ease my mind about running these roms.
My thought and conclusion on this, is these roms should be fine to run, unless you change or mask your imei to show as a N7. Unless these carrier tech guys are stupid enough to use a script that only detects your build id. Which shouldn't be how it's handled.

aaron74 said:
Exactly, kinda what i meant is, they shouldn't be turning off your phone because of build.prop properties showing as N7. It should all be done by imei.
But that post had me worried, cause he makes it sound like his phone was shut down just for having N7 port rom. Which should not be the case. Unless there's something going on there we don't know about (like changed imei)
Thanks for your input. Cause i was trying to ease my mind about running these roms.
My thought and conclusion on this, is these roms should be fine to run, unless you change or mask your imei to show as a N7. Unless these carrier tech guys are stupid enough to use a script that only detects your build id. Which shouldn't be how it's handled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He never said that it was due to a build.prop value, so I'm not sure where you got that - he specifically said that it was because of the IMEI

styles420 said:
He never said that it was due to a build.prop value, so I'm not sure where you got that - he specifically said that it was because of the IMEI
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He really didn't say what caused it, just that the IMEI was black listed: "The (AT&T) representative was adamant that the phone imei had been blocked by TMobile, but a call to them confirmed that while at&t put in the blacklisting, reported the phone as stolen as soon as Nemesis ROM registered a note 7 to their system yesterday night, and that there was nothing in their system they could do to unblock the imei. Long story short, after explaining the concept of custom Roms to the rep, at&t has put an unblock request in to be resolved by the 14th, hopefully it works, and just a word of warning to everyone!
PS. I had also changed build.prop product model to SM-G935F shortly after installing yesterday, so the red flag must've gone into their system as soon as it went online. Maybe developers need to stop putting the N9300 as the product model stock to avoid this!!"
It's hard to tell if the fact that he changed the model in the build.prop is what caused the blacklisting. I wonder if he had it properly unlocked from T-Mobile to use it on AT&T? That could have been part of the problem. I was told once, by T-Mobile, that the original owner of a phone had to request the unlocking, on T-Mobile. One thing I do know, is that it is illegal to take an IMEI from one phone and put it on another phone. For example, say you had Note 4, with a broken digitizer. You bought a working, but blacklisted Note 4. Then took the IMEI from your original N4 and put it on the blacklisted one. That's illegal. I fail to see how it would even work if you had 2 different models of phone, though. Or maybe, that was, indeed, what caused the blacklisting. OTOH, people have been porting ROMS from different models forever, and no one has complained of this that we've heard of. As we all know, there were Note 5 ports, as well as S7 ports...

smarcin said:
He really didn't say what caused it, just that the IMEI was black listed: "The (AT&T) representative was adamant that the phone imei had been blocked by TMobile, but a call to them confirmed that while at&t put in the blacklisting, reported the phone as stolen as soon as Nemesis ROM registered a note 7 to their system yesterday night, and that there was nothing in their system they could do to unblock the imei. Long story short, after explaining the concept of custom Roms to the rep, at&t has put an unblock request in to be resolved by the 14th, hopefully it works, and just a word of warning to everyone!
PS. I had also changed build.prop product model to SM-G935F shortly after installing yesterday, so the red flag must've gone into their system as soon as it went online. Maybe developers need to stop putting the N9300 as the product model stock to avoid this!!"
It's hard to tell if the fact that he changed the model in the build.prop is what caused the blacklisting. I wonder if he had it properly unlocked from T-Mobile to use it on AT&T? That could have been part of the problem. I was told once, by T-Mobile, that the original owner of a phone had to request the unlocking, on T-Mobile. One thing I do know, is that it is illegal to take an IMEI from one phone and put it on another phone. For example, say you had Note 4, with a broken digitizer. You bought a working, but blacklisted Note 4. Then took the IMEI from your original N4 and put it on the blacklisted one. That's illegal. I fail to see how it would even work if you had 2 different models of phone, though. Or maybe, that was, indeed, what caused the blacklisting. OTOH, people have been porting ROMS from different models forever, and no one has complained of this that we've heard of. As we all know, there were Note 5 ports, as well as S7 ports...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know the build.prop isn't a factor - custom rom developers have used a different device model for various reasons without issue (I've seen it used in order to allow apps to be downloaded from the play store that were incorrectly marked as incompatible with that device, by changing the build.prop model to that of a device that was compatible with the app)
I seriously doubt that a developer included his own (or anyone else's) IMEI in a custom rom - they either know better, or they brick devices with the various other similar mistakes they would make. Besides, there wouldn't be just one user with this issue...
The most likely scenario is that the user tried something questionable with his IMEI and wants help fixing the mistake/bad decision without having to admit what really happened

styles420 said:
I know the build.prop isn't a factor - custom rom developers have used a different device model for various reasons without issue (I've seen it used in order to allow apps to be downloaded from the play store that were incorrectly marked as incompatible with that device, by changing the build.prop model to that of a device that was compatible with the app)
I seriously doubt that a developer included his own (or anyone else's) IMEI in a custom rom - they either know better, or they brick devices with the various other similar mistakes they would make. Besides, there wouldn't be just one user with this issue...
The most likely scenario is that the user tried something questionable with his IMEI and wants help fixing the mistake/bad decision without having to admit what really happened
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all i agree with your last sentence and there is definitely something going on with his IMEI between AT&T and T-Mobile. that the part of the equation that is a bit fishy to me. I don't think he was completely forthcoming with his IMEI situation to begin with.
Another thing, the IMEI is never part of any device's flashable software package. Ever. This stuff get's written to EFS and other databases after the flash and during the initial rom setup and activation process so no rom chef can or will include any EFS or IMEI information into any rom. that simply makes no sense.
I also agree that blacklisting in this situation with the recalled N7 should be handled by IMEI databases and not solely on the devices "reported" device model over the network. That's how blacklisting is typically done in situations of lost/stolen devices or when you file an insurance claim on the device. The insurance company and the carrier enter the device's serial numbers into the IMEI blacklist database so they cannot be activated on that network. I can only assume that all network providers are going to honor Samsung's request to deactivate all N7's as well as it being banned by the FCC which also requires carriers to remove these devices from the stores and prevent them from working on their networks. Carriers have a legal obligation to follow these laws and guidelines set forth by the FCC. Period.
So in my opinion we should technically be able to use ported N7 roms on other devices with the build.prop device model etc to the values of that of the N7 variants and not have to worry about our phones' IMEI getting blacklisted. But I have already taken the precaution and changed the build.prop values in my current Sprint N7 port rom (still in final testing phase) just to be safe. I may test the N7 device model in build.prop once the "deactivation" date passes and see what happens. I have two N4's so I can deal with it if my phone incorrectly gets blacklisted due to running a port rom.

tx_dbs_tx said:
First of all i agree with your last sentence and there is definitely something going on with his IMEI between AT&T and T-Mobile. that the part of the equation that is a bit fishy to me. I don't think he was completely forthcoming with his IMEI situation to begin with.
Another thing, the IMEI is never part of any device's flashable software package. Ever. This stuff get's written to EFS and other databases after the flash and during the initial rom setup and activation process so no rom chef can or will include any EFS or IMEI information into any rom. that simply makes no sense.
I also agree that blacklisting in this situation with the recalled N7 should be handled by IMEI databases and not solely on the devices "reported" device model over the network. That's how blacklisting is typically done in situations of lost/stolen devices or when you file an insurance claim on the device. The insurance company and the carrier enter the device's serial numbers into the IMEI blacklist database so they cannot be activated on that network. I can only assume that all network providers are going to honor Samsung's request to deactivate all N7's as well as it being banned by the FCC which also requires carriers to remove these devices from the stores and prevent them from working on their networks. Carriers have a legal obligation to follow these laws and guidelines set forth by the FCC. Period.
So in my opinion we should technically be able to use ported N7 roms on other devices with the build.prop device model etc to the values of that of the N7 variants and not have to worry about our phones' IMEI getting blacklisted. But I have already taken the precaution and changed the build.prop values in my current Sprint N7 port rom (still in final testing phase) just to be safe. I may test the N7 device model in build.prop once the "deactivation" date passes and see what happens. I have two N4's so I can deal with it if my phone incorrectly gets blacklisted due to running a port rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use my note 4 outside US so I think there is no worry about blacklist since I use it in non-US CDMA carrier so I am waiting for your N7 rom with no worry ... And I hope that you include international languages to the ROM because the system apps included only 6 languages in their res folder.
Also WIFI HOTSPOT feature as always in your roms.
Thank you.

Here's the latest the guy posted over in the Nemesis thread:
"I'm following up, my debacle from the blacklisted imei / suspended service with AT&T continues (after installing this ROM). AT&T tech rep confirms all of my issues stem from actions lead by Samsung and automatically carried out by AT&T's system. Dev, please updated your build.prop to new update as maybe many of the new people flashing this rom are not getting service / data, as Samsung is becoming increasingly more aggressive and they have no way to tell if it's a real Note 7 or not, according to AT&T people..."
You'd think Samsung and the carriers have both the IMEI and it's corresponding model in their databases. But maybe they think that a Note7 owner could be desperate enough to keep their N7 and tried to reassign the IMEI from their Note 4 to a Note7. I know I really liked my Note7, but not THAT much! Also, we can probably safely discount that the AT&T tech rep really knew what he or she was talking about.

wel in any case i'm rebuilding my still unreleased N7 port and simply tweaking the build.prop and csc cures the N7 ban concerns. No worries on my end. I just need a little time to rebuild my rom from the latest softwares.

Funny I remember flashing a N7 port rom on my wife Note 4 from Verizon, when we had them.. When you plugged the phone into the computer, it would recognize it as a Note 7. I wonder why?

tx_dbs_tx said:
wel in any case i'm rebuilding my still unreleased N7 port and simply tweaking the build.prop and csc cures the N7 ban concerns. No worries on my end. I just need a little time to rebuild my rom from the latest softwares.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take your time man. As much as I was hoping to see it released before this weekend I, along with others, will gladly wait patiently while you work on polishing this ROM. Looking forward to it! And many many thanks (can only press the thanks button once lol)

jbuggydroid said:
Take your time man. As much as I was hoping to see it released before this weekend I, along with others, will gladly wait patiently while you work on polishing this ROM. Looking forward to it! And many many thanks (can only press the thanks button once lol)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Me too! Many thanks. I'm sure it'll be great!
Also,
I'm still in disbelief that samsung or at&t would be so noobish to shut down a phone just by reading it's build.prop as a N7(or whatever the case was). Even if they were worried about just going by imei lookup, this just don't seem right. I'm sure they could run some remote script to read it's hardware or bootloader, or modem (I can go on), and know it's not a N7.
Has anyone heard of anyone else this happening to? I'm just thinking there was more to this story than getting blacklisted from flashing aN7 port.
Sorry to rant about this but i can't believe a tech that high up the chain would write code that simple, to allow this to happen.

aaron74 said:
Me too! Many thanks. I'm sure it'll be great!
Also,
I'm still in disbelief that samsung or at&t would be so noobish to shut down a phone just by reading it's build.prop as a N7(or whatever the case was). Even if they were worried about just going by imei lookup, this just don't seem right. I'm sure they could run some remote script to read it's hardware or bootloader, or modem (I can go on), and know it's not a N7.
Has anyone heard of anyone else this happening to? I'm just thinking there was more to this story than getting blacklisted from flashing aN7 port.
Sorry to rant about this but i can't believe a tech that high up the chain would write code that simple, to allow this to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can tell the network looks at the FCCID so unless you change that in the rom it will flag on the network and service will be terminated on the device.

tx_dbs_tx said:
From what I can tell the network looks at the FCCID so unless you change that in the rom it will flag on the network and service will be terminated on the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool, Thanks for the info. I'll have to remember that. Ive changed that in floating features before in another rom. But i only changed G to P, to denote sprint model. I'll remember to not change model#.
Any word on your roms arrival?

aaron74 said:
Cool, Thanks for the info. I'll have to remember that. Ive changed that in floating features before in another rom. But i only changed G to P, to denote sprint model. I'll remember to not change model#.
Any word on your roms arrival?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm rebuilding the rom as I type this. Lots of things i'm having to do to get the rom where I'm happy with it. As for the FCCID in floating features set it to that of the N5 variant and that will be good. Same in build.prop device model. Set that to N920P and that will do the trick and not have any negative effects on the rom. This is what I have done to my N7 test rom and tests have proven this to be the best workaround according to my test group who are running the rom as their daily for weeks now. Sorry about the delay with my N7 rom but I want it to be ready with little to no issues before I release it to the public. There's a lot on the line and I have to make sure peoples' phones will not be impacted by running this custom firmware. It seems to be perfectly fine and no loss of services yet. I will post when the rom is actually ready for a public release so not to keep people in suspense when the rom just isn't up to my standards yet.

tx_dbs_tx said:
I'm rebuilding the rom as I type this. Lots of things i'm having to do to get the rom where I'm happy with it. ....
There's a lot on the line and I have to make sure peoples' phones will not be impacted by running this custom firmware. It seems to be perfectly fine and no loss of services yet. I will post when the rom is actually ready for a public release so not to keep people in suspense when the rom just isn't up to my standards yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I understand. I was not trying to sound impatient, just curious. No worries here! I empathize with the amount of time it must take to port and debug these TW roms.
I know you only release your roms stable and working great.
I'll be anticipating it's announcement. Thanks for your reply and heads up about everything else. :good:

tx_dbs_tx said:
I will post when the rom is actually ready for a public release so not to keep people in suspense when the rom just isn't up to my standards yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been refreshing the thread and searching on your posts for what seems like weeks now. I'm a bit anxious.

Related

[Q] 16gb specific ROMs install on 32gb or 64gb S4?

Maybe it's a stupid question to many, but... I have the chance to order a 32gb korean version of the S4 off Taobao.com, and since I live in China it's quite convenient. The only issue I have is that I refuse to use an android phone without rooting it, and I've been a happy Wanam user for a long time on my S3.
The taobao seller states that 16gb ROMs CANNOT be used for 32gb models AT ALL, but I know better than blindly trusting ignorant Chinese vendors who usually don't know what they are talking about (personal experience).
It does not matter whether it's 9500, 9505 or whatever, this seller has all the models (even 9508 dual sim), I just want to understand if SIZE is a problem or not... Will I be able to just simply root it, and keep using the stock ROM at least? Or maybe I'll even be able to install ANY 16gb ROM of my choice? Or none of the above???
Thanks!
P.S. I searched the S4 forums but found no reference at all to this question...
UoMoTaLpA said:
Maybe it's a stupid question to many, but... I have the chance to order a 32gb korean version of the S4 off Taobao.com, and since I live in China it's quite convenient. The only issue I have is that I refuse to use an android phone without rooting it, and I've been a happy Wanam user for a long time on my S3.
The taobao seller states that 16gb ROMs CANNOT be used for 32gb models AT ALL, but I know better than blindly trusting ignorant Chinese vendors who usually don't know what they are talking about (personal experience).
It does not matter whether it's 9500, 9505 or whatever, this seller has all the models (even 9508 dual sim), I just want to understand if SIZE is a problem or not... Will I be able to just simply root it, and keep using the stock ROM at least? Or maybe I'll even be able to install ANY 16gb ROM of my choice? Or none of the above???
Thanks!
P.S. I searched the S4 forums but found no reference at all to this question...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as you're flashing a i9505 ROM to an i9505-like(aka U.S. Carriers variants) device, and an i9500 ROM to an i9500-like device, you'll be just fine. Don't try to flash unlike devices(i.e. i9505 to i9500) though. Best case scenario, the flash will fail. Worst case, you'll brick the device.
Internal storage capacity has never, to my knowledge, had anything to do with what you could or could not flash.
unremarked said:
As long as you're flashing a i9505 ROM to an i9505-like(aka U.S. Carriers variants) device, and an i9500 ROM to an i9500-like device, you'll be just fine. Don't try to flash unlike devices(i.e. i9505 to i9500) though. Best case scenario, the flash will fail. Worst case, you'll brick the device.
Internal storage capacity has never, to my knowledge, had anything to do with what you could or could not flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be my same guess, although the seller was adamant to the fact that it won't absolutely work (he even declared that he tried himself...). Though I agree with you, I'll wait for some concrete proof, when 32 and 64 gb versions will be more widely available, or at least until someone comes out with a first-person experience of this.
Anyway, thanks
UoMoTaLpA said:
That would be my same guess, although the seller was adamant to the fact that it won't absolutely work (he even declared that he tried himself...). Though I agree with you, I'll wait for some concrete proof, when 32 and 64 gb versions will be more widely available, or at least until someone comes out with a first-person experience of this.
Anyway, thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want to call the guy out... but that seller has some very funny ideas; likely he was trying to flash unlike devices. If you want further feedback, I'd suggest posting this question over in the AT&T forums since the 32gb is more widely released. Further, from my past experiences, I've successfully flashed ROMs intended for the Developer Edition(64gb) of the HTC One onto my 32gb.
Let's say, hypothetically, he's correct--the developers who create the ROMs would be required to, perhaps not by forum rules but more so out of "I'm not responsible if you do this," declare their ROMs only usable by certain phones with certain storage capacities?
I will applaud you for taking your time, reading, and doing research before jumping into the fray. Is this your first phone you've rooted?
unremarked said:
I don't want to call the guy out... but that seller has some very funny ideas; likely he was trying to flash unlike devices. If you want further feedback, I'd suggest posting this question over in the AT&T forums since the 32gb is more widely released. Further, from my past experiences, I've successfully flashed ROMs intended for the Developer Edition(64gb) of the HTC One onto my 32gb.
Let's say, hypothetically, he's correct--the developers who create the ROMs would be required to, perhaps not by forum rules but more so out of "I'm not responsible if you do this," declare their ROMs only usable by certain phones with certain storage capacities?
I will applaud you for taking your time, reading, and doing research before jumping into the fray. Is this your first phone you've rooted?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all, I rooted my first HTC Legend years ago, then my current S3,and so on. Happy user of Wanamlite ROM on my current S3 at the moment. Anyway, I guess our idea is correct. Not to belittle the vendor's experience, but in MY experience PRC people can be quite often very ignorant, or appear so at the very least, and declare the impossibility of an action or a request just to avoid any sort of responsibility in case the crap hits the fan... Think it as a sort of "ultimate disclaimer": I told you not to do it, so if you try and break it it's your problem.
After saying all this, I guess I'm in no rush since my S3 is still working like a charm after more than one year, I'm just exploring the S4 alley since I bough a SUPERCOOL Nolan bluetooth helmet for my bike, I use 2 sim cards at the same time (1 personal=S3, 1 work=HTClegend) and the HTC Legend's bluetooth is sort of fried So I was looking for a way to upgrade things.
I'll follow your suggestion and try to post in the AT&T section as well.
Thanks!

Will Non-Verizon Firmware Work?

Hey everyone -
Apologies if this has been asked before, but a simple search didn't turn up results. Verizon (surprise surprise) is already lagging behind on firmware updates. For those of us who are S-Off, unlocked, and on custom ROMs, is it possible to flash an updated firmware (such as 1.80.617.1) and still use our phones? Or are we stuck on Verizon's release cycle for firmware updates?
EDIT - I meant to post this in the Questions & Answers section, my apologies. If any mods want to move it, please feel free.
btonetbone said:
Hey everyone -
Apologies if this has been asked before, but a simple search didn't turn up results. Verizon (surprise surprise) is already lagging behind on firmware updates. For those of us who are S-Off, unlocked, and on custom ROMs, is it possible to flash an updated firmware (such as 1.80.617.1) and still use our phones? Or are we stuck on Verizon's release cycle for firmware updates?
EDIT - I meant to post this in the Questions & Answers section, my apologies. If any mods want to move it, please feel free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
we're stuck on verizon's firmware. i use viper and the software is updated to the latest release, just not using the eu/intl firmware.
btonetbone said:
Hey everyone -
Apologies if this has been asked before, but a simple search didn't turn up results. Verizon (surprise surprise) is already lagging behind on firmware updates. For those of us who are S-Off, unlocked, and on custom ROMs, is it possible to flash an updated firmware (such as 1.80.617.1) and still use our phones? Or are we stuck on Verizon's release cycle for firmware updates?
EDIT - I meant to post this in the Questions & Answers section, my apologies. If any mods want to move it, please feel free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are on Verizon you should be using Verizon firmware. Just because a version number is different doesn't mean it's ahead. They are different forks tested and tweaked for entirely different networks.
Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk
dottat said:
If you are on Verizon you should be using Verizon firmware. Just because a version number is different doesn't mean it's ahead. They are different forks tested and tweaked for entirely different networks.
Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But does that hold true when flashing the Verizon radio behind the other firmware?(not challenging your statement here, just asking a variation of the OP question)
I think that is the main thing people want to know when this topic comes up. I've seen the question and information on it scattered in pieces across multiple threads, but never fully answered by being backed with a report by someone who did it.
So you don't think I am one of those that just sits back to let someone else do the work - I am willing to try such a thing by flashing the US unlocked or Europe FW followed by the VZW radio you pulled, but would need a little guidance in terms of how to provide feedback. Test signal before/after? I know from Viper thread loss of camera is something to watch out for. Any other specific items/parameters to check before/after? Since Viper just did a re-base, I have been searching and debating between those two FW anyway. First the Euro to match the ROM, then the US because they have the ROM flashing on all FW out at the moment.
camparks said:
But does that hold true when flashing the Verizon radio behind the other firmware?(not challenging your statement here, just asking a variation of the OP question)
I think that is the main thing people want to know when this topic comes up. I've seen the question and information on it scattered in pieces across multiple threads, but never fully answered by being backed with a report by someone who did it.
So you don't think I am one of those that just sits back to let someone else do the work - I am willing to try such a thing by flashing the US unlocked or Europe FW followed by the VZW radio you pulled, but would need a little guidance in terms of how to provide feedback. Test signal before/after? I know from Viper thread loss of camera is something to watch out for. Any other specific items/parameters to check before/after? Since Viper just did a re-base, I have been searching and debating between those two FW anyway. First the Euro to match the ROM, then the US because they have the ROM flashing on all FW out at the moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So here's the thing... you will see unlocked users who simply flashed the radio complain they often get stuck on 3g/1x. You will see the posts about the camera loss. You will see things about loss of volte. The firmware is always optimized for the rom/carrier for which it was written. They won't include vzw fixes in unlocked firmware since that phone isn't targeted for use on the vzw network.
Between the rom and the firmware it's really just a different fork altogether. They aren't mean to be used without each other as a dependency.
Euro firmware will likely have some odd wifi side effects for some folks as they use different bands over there.
dottat said:
So here's the thing... you will see unlocked users who simply flashed the radio complain they often get stuck on 3g/1x. You will see the posts about the camera loss. You will see things about loss of volte. The firmware is always optimized for the rom/carrier for which it was written. They won't include vzw fixes in unlocked firmware since that phone isn't targeted for use on the vzw network.
Between the rom and the firmware it's really just a different fork altogether. They aren't mean to be used without each other as a dependency.
Euro firmware will likely have some odd wifi side effects for some folks as they use different bands over there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So can we back up just a bit to where I believe this all stems from - Is the HTC 10 truly a single-hardware phone? Therein, making all "variants" manifested only by which firmware is flashed? Is that true globally? If not, is that true for all in a particular "zone"(Europe, Asia, US, etc.)?
Ok, with the Euro FW the issues are apparent, given different standards not only for cellular, but also the camera and wi-fi vary from those here in the US. Even if one were to flash a US carrier radio, the camera and wi-fi issues could still pop up. Moving on from that consideration.
For US unlocked, there should be no standards issue, correct? Assuming hardware is the same for atleast all US carriers, what besides the radios would differ between carriers when not running stock ROMs?
Obviously there would be issues when on stock ROMs due to custom apps, features, etc. that would break not only when running different non-stock FW, but also when running one carrier's stock ROM on another carrier's network. All that is ill-advised and goes back to you only recommending stock FW.
Thanks for discussing this. I do not question your advise at all, I just want to explore the what and why of it all to put it all in one place. Thanks for humoring me and my questions!
camparks said:
So can we back up just a bit to where I believe this all stems from - Is the HTC 10 truly a single-hardware phone? Therein, making all "variants" manifested only by which firmware is flashed? Is that true globally? If not, is that true for all in a particular "zone"(Europe, Asia, US, etc.)?
Ok, with the Euro FW the issues are apparent, given different standards not only for cellular, but also the camera and wi-fi vary from those here in the US. Even if one were to flash a US carrier radio, the camera and wi-fi issues could still pop up. Moving on from that consideration.
For US unlocked, there should be no standards issue, correct? Assuming hardware is the same for atleast all US carriers, what besides the radios would differ between carriers when not running stock ROMs?
Obviously there would be issues when on stock ROMs due to custom apps, features, etc. that would break not only when running different non-stock FW, but also when running one carrier's stock ROM on another carrier's network. All that is ill-advised and goes back to you only recommending stock FW.
Thanks for discussing this. I do not question your advise at all, I just want to explore the what and why of it all to put it all in one place. Thanks for humoring me and my questions!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hardware wise most are the same. And you are right about me recommending firmware that matches your carrier. That aside, my experience has been like this....
I have been asked a couple times to try to fully convert a phone from one carrier to another. On the 10, we know that unlocked<->verizon works and we thought it would since HTC gave them the same MID (different CIDs though). On the m9, I have attempted to fully convert a verizon m9 to an ATT model. The RUU flashes everything BUT tp and one or two other ones. It boots up fine (att death star and all)... but it will never boot to recovery and never load TWRP when flashed. There's something about the overall partition structure that makes it different.
On the rom/firmware front.... Verizon and HTC do very specific testing for firmware/OS releases. They do this not only to ensure optimal performance for the user, but also to make sure that the phone itself doesn't cause issues on the network itself. As the manager of an engineering team for a huge US based ISP, I can tell you that firmware of devices CAN and DOES impact the network stability from time to time. I'm not talking about capacity issues, I'm talking about your phone making a phone call and causing a network card back at the CO/Tower/ETC reset. It does happen.
Lastly, I measure things by what you gain. What would gain by flashing unlocked or EU firmware images onto a phone on the verizon network? An increase in number version? As much as I see people who change their aboot do so to avoid red text, it always surprised me to see a VZW phone with a third X.X.401.X number on their bootloader indicating non-vzw firmware. There's a new piece of fun around since the m9 and present on the 10. If you manage to get an aboot on your phone doesnt match your firmware and you reboot the phone you will be stuck in bootloader with no access to download/recovery and often OS. The only fix is to manually flash each firmware image / partition file by name manually and it must match the aboot for it to work. So that's another reason to not go and mix and match because to be honest... most people don't make it beyond the panic moment of that. That phone gets returned and added to the reasons verizon makes it more difficult going forward.
\
There's my 2 cents

All things root and Bootloader?

Hi Friends,
Hope you're all having a great new year. So last time I was lurking the S7E forums, we had a leaked Engineering Bootloader that was used to acquire root on all US Snapdragon models, albeit, with a lot performance issues and etc.
I came here to glance as well as all other variant forums for the SD model and now we have Root for every model, with even ROMs being baked like the Echo ROM for Verizon, Sprint, AT&T models, usually the toughest to achieve these things on. I'm trying to read through the forums, but I fear I'm missing the details, that will help me pull the trigger for getting the device or not.
Can one of you very experienced, knowledgeable, and kind members educate me on the latest?
1. Do we have unlocked Bootloader and Root for all US carrier S7Es? How is it done? I use people using Flashfire. So no TWRP?
2. Does this process still trip Knox and render Samsung Pay to never be used again on the device?
3. If I bought the Verizon variant, for example, can I root, unlock Bootloader, and etc, and then return to stock, to return to the store in case I don't like the phone?
4. Xposed Framework working for all models?
Much appreciate your responses, any and all of them in advance! Thanks!
ProFragger said:
Hi Friends,
Hope you're all having a great new year. So last time I was lurking the S7E forums, we had a leaked Engineering Bootloader that was used to acquire root on all US Snapdragon models, albeit, with a lot performance issues and etc.
I came here to glance as well as all other variant forums for the SD model and now we have Root for every model, with even ROMs being baked like the Echo ROM for Verizon, Sprint, AT&T models, usually the toughest to achieve these things on. I'm trying to read through the forums, but I fear I'm missing the details, that will help me pull the trigger for getting the device or not.
Can one of you very experienced, knowledgeable, and kind members educate me on the latest?
1. Do we have unlocked Bootloader and Root for all US carrier S7Es? How is it done? I use people using Flashfire. So no TWRP?
2. Does this process still trip Knox and render Samsung Pay to never be used again on the device?
3. If I bought the Verizon variant, for example, can I root, unlock Bootloader, and etc, and then return to stock, to return to the store in case I don't like the phone?
4. Xposed Framework working for all models?
Much appreciate your responses, any and all of them in advance! Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely nothing has changed on root (only possible due to ENG kernel) and bootloader unlock (which is not yet possible).
1. No
2. No
3. No
4. No idea about all models. For the t-mobile one, please check: https://forum.xda-developers.com/tmobile-s7-edge/how-to/guide-installing-xposed-framework-t3414718
You can use the search feature in xda for finding out
CravingMender9 said:
Absolutely nothing has changed on root (only possible due to ENG kernel) and bootloader unlock (which is not yet possible).
1. No
2. No
3. No
4. No idea about all models. For the t-mobile one, please check: https://forum.xda-developers.com/tmobile-s7-edge/how-to/guide-installing-xposed-framework-t3414718
You can use the search feature in xda for finding out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey bud, thanks for getting the ball rolling on these questions. If you could add some more information, I'd appreciate it :
If we still don't have a way to Root or Unlock bootloader, how are these ROMs (Echo, Tek, and other stock ROMs) available with root? And how are these flashed? Are we somehow bypassing the BL by using FlashFire?
Can you also educate me on the U Firmware and why people install it and is it reverseable?
Lastly, if I got a T-Mobile variant for example, installed these ROMs Tek, Echo, etc, can I return to Stock completely and return to T-Mobile, by any chance for them to take it back? Thank you again!
for the t mobile variant, I was able to flash the U firmware and flash back to stock t mobile. NOTE: I did not flash the U bootloader. I kept the T mobile bootloader just be sure I could flash back to stock t mobile(APK1). I'm sure this method would work with other carriers as well. so what ever variant you have, make sure you stay on that BL and only flash the U firmware CSC and AP. As for the CP(modem) I would flash your carriers latest CP file. That's what worked best for me with the U firmware. Currently I'm using the latest nougat BETA
Thank you very much for your response, bud. One last follow up question: Since all the US variants are rooting based on the ENG Kernel, is there really a benefit of getting one variant over another, for rooting or etc purposes?
P. S. May I ask why you flashed the U Firmware? What are the advantages of it? ?
ProFragger said:
Thank you very much for your response, bud. One last follow up question: Since all the US variants are rooting based on the ENG Kernel, is there really a benefit of getting one variant over another, for rooting or etc purposes?
P. S. May I ask why you flashed the U Firmware? What are the advantages of it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The u firmware basically does not include all of the software that is usually included with the phone. For example.. Tmobile with their software on it, Verizon att etc... Makes the phone a bit snappier especially if you were to root. Even tho I hope for a more stable root still. I am rooted at the moment. Wish they didn't recall the note 7 because the root on that was better
ProFragger said:
Hi Friends,
Hope you're all having a great new year. So last time I was lurking the S7E forums, we had a leaked Engineering Bootloader that was used to acquire root on all US Snapdragon models, albeit, with a lot performance issues and etc.
I came here to glance as well as all other variant forums for the SD model and now we have Root for every model, with even ROMs being baked like the Echo ROM for Verizon, Sprint, AT&T models, usually the toughest to achieve these things on. I'm trying to read through the forums, but I fear I'm missing the details, that will help me pull the trigger for getting the device or not.
Can one of you very experienced, knowledgeable, and kind members educate me on the latest?
1. Do we have unlocked Bootloader and Root for all US carrier S7Es? How is it done? I use people using Flashfire. So no TWRP?
2. Does this process still trip Knox and render Samsung Pay to never be used again on the device?
3. If I bought the Verizon variant, for example, can I root, unlock Bootloader, and etc, and then return to stock, to return to the store in case I don't like the phone?
4. Xposed Framework working for all models?
Much appreciate your responses, any and all of them in advance! Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're confused. At least, you were.
We do not have an "unlocked Bootloader" and we never did. We had an engineering kernel. That engineering kernel allows certain commands that enabled us to acquire root access. But without that kernel, the system (with the original kernel or boot partition) checks for any changes in the /system partition. If any are found it triggers a bootloop. So basically, if you want root we MUST have the engineering kernel. Unless someone else finds another way that's just the way that it is.
Personally, I unrooted and went back to stock. Root was okay at first but with the lack of development, Samsung Pay and the fact that Android 7+ will probably not be seeing root... well... time to accept the fact that Samsung owns the phone even though we bought it. What else can we do?
nitroevo said:
The u firmware basically does not include all of the software that is usually included with the phone. For example.. Tmobile with their software on it, Verizon att etc... Makes the phone a bit snappier especially if you were to root. Even tho I hope for a more stable root still. I am rooted at the moment. Wish they didn't recall the note 7 because the root on that was better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Binary100100 said:
You're confused. At least, you were.
We do not have an "unlocked Bootloader" and we never did. We had an engineering kernel. That engineering kernel allows certain commands that enabled us to acquire root access. But without that kernel, the system (with the original kernel or boot partition) checks for any changes in the /system partition. If any are found it triggers a bootloop. So basically, if you want root we MUST have the engineering kernel. Unless someone else finds another way that's just the way that it is.
Personally, I unrooted and went back to stock. Root was okay at first but with the lack of development, Samsung Pay and the fact that Android 7+ will probably not be seeing root... well... time to accept the fact that Samsung owns the phone even though we bought it. What else can we do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your helpful responses fellas. I understand root is not perfect, but for some folks like me, Xposed seems to be worth the trouble. For Samsung Pay, I intend to use the Gear S3 one day ?.
Final question, since all US Snapdragon models are using the engineering kernel to root and etc... Is there a benefit of getting one carrier variant, over another? For example, Verizon is usually the cheapest. Is it wise to get that, with the U Firmware, to use on AT&T? Thanks!
ProFragger said:
For Samsung Pay, I intend to use the Gear S3 one day .
Final question, since all US Snapdragon models are using the engineering kernel to root and etc... Is there a benefit of getting one carrier variant, over another? For example, Verizon is usually the cheapest. Is it wise to get that, with the U Firmware, to use on AT&T? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me know if that works out for you then.
I just purchased the S2 Classic (on T-Mobile) and use Samsung Pay quite a bit. But I can tell you that it does open Samsung Pay on the phone and if you are rooted, Samsung Pay will not work at all. So I'm not sure if it will work at all for you even with the S3.
In regards to your other inquiry, I haven't tried the U firmware. I read something about data issues, no wifi calling (which is pretty important to me), no hotspot (which is also really important to me) but I heard that it is really fast. Not sure how much of that is still a problem but you should probably read up on it before doing anything first. But the rooting method is all the same between carriers I believe. All require the engineering kernel and breaks Samsung Pay along with a couple of other apps.
Just make back ups, have a stock firmware available to flash with ODIN just in case and remember that it's almost impossible to brick this device (because we don't have an unlocked bootloader.)
Binary100100 said:
Let me know if that works out for you then.
I just purchased the S2 Classic (on T-Mobile) and use Samsung Pay quite a bit. But I can tell you that it does open Samsung Pay on the phone and if you are rooted, Samsung Pay will not work at all. So I'm not sure if it will work at all for you even with the S3.
In regards to your other inquiry, I haven't tried the U firmware. I read something about data issues, no wifi calling (which is pretty important to me), no hotspot (which is also really important to me) but I heard that it is really fast. Not sure how much of that is still a problem but you should probably read up on it before doing anything first. But the rooting method is all the same between carriers I believe. All require the engineering kernel and breaks Samsung Pay along with a couple of other apps.
Just make back ups, have a stock firmware available to flash with ODIN just in case and remember that it's almost impossible to brick this device (because we don't have an unlocked bootloader.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you again for a helpful post. So the S3 has a dedicated MST/NFC chip in it, that allows for Samsung Pay to work from the watch, it's done through the Gear app. That's what I have read.
About the rest of it, again, curious to see if there is one US variant, superior to another in terms of Root capabilities or bands and radios available and etc? Can anyone confirm this for me?
Thanks!
ProFragger said:
Thank you again for a helpful post. So the S3 has a dedicated MST/NFC chip in it, that allows for Samsung Pay to work from the watch, it's done through the Gear app. That's what I have read.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So does the S2.
When I was setting up the Samsung Pay on my watch it said that it had to download an update.
Then I went through the setup process through my phone which was from the Samsung Pay app.
You go to "Add card" on your watch and it opens Samsung Pay on your phone.
You click "Next" and it displays your Samsung account information.
Then it takes you to a screen that says "Setup complete" telling you that you're ready to use it and at the bottom says "Add card"
You do that all from the Samsung Pay app on your phone which leads me to suspect that if you root your phone, you won't be able to use Samsung Pay on your watch.
People on this thread that you have to set it all up first, remove the Samsung Pay app on the phone but leave it on the watch. If it's all done correctly then it should work. Just make sure you get it all set up first.
Next thing that I'm going to try is using my watch in "Standalone" with my phone out of bluetooth or wifi range. See if that still works.
ProFragger said:
About the rest of it, again, curious to see if there is one US variant, superior to another in terms of Root capabilities or bands and radios available and etc? Can anyone confirm this for me?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know, the U firmware permits use of some other bands that aren't normally used. Not sure which ones though.
Binary100100 said:
So does the S2.
When I was setting up the Samsung Pay on my watch it said that it had to download an update.
Then I went through the setup process through my phone which was from the Samsung Pay app.
You go to "Add card" on your watch and it opens Samsung Pay on your phone.
You click "Next" and it displays your Samsung account information.
Then it takes you to a screen that says "Setup complete" telling you that you're ready to use it and at the bottom says "Add card"
You do that all from the Samsung Pay app on your phone which leads me to suspect that if you root your phone, you won't be able to use Samsung Pay on your watch.
People on this thread that you have to set it all up first, remove the Samsung Pay app on the phone but leave it on the watch. If it's all done correctly then it should work. Just make sure you get it all set up first.
Next thing that I'm going to try is using my watch in "Standalone" with my phone out of bluetooth or wifi range. See if that still works.
As far as I know, the U firmware permits use of some other bands that aren't normally used. Not sure which ones though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the correction/education on the S2, bud, much appreciated. I wonder if the rooted phone works with the S3, because Samsung has allowed many other non Samsung phones to know work with the S3? But I could be wrong, I thought it was open like that with the S2 as well, no? Looking forward to your testing, hope there is a breakthrough in there! ?
if you want root and customizability and roms, just don't get this phone. you will be very disappointed with the performance once you root and it gets so much worse with Xposed. not worth it at all, you will have better performance and speed from a 4 year old phone that has an unlocked bootloader and strong development. I mean my Nexus 5 (from 2012) had better performance than my rooted S7. it sounds like you do want roms, and if you want roms then AOSP/Cyanogenmod is the way to go. there will probably never be any AOSP or CM ROM on the QC S7/E so you're better off getting an older galaxy model that does have a great development community and unlocked bootloader. or just get a OnePlus or Nexus or something.
xVermicide said:
if you want root and customizability and roms, just don't get this phone. you will be very disappointed with the performance once you root and it gets so much worse with Xposed. not worth it at all, you will have better performance and speed from a 4 year old phone that has an unlocked bootloader and strong development. I mean my Nexus 5 (from 2012) had better performance than my rooted S7. it sounds like you do want roms, and if you want roms then AOSP/Cyanogenmod is the way to go. there will probably never be any AOSP or CM ROM on the QC S7/E so you're better off getting an older galaxy model that does have a great development community and unlocked bootloader. or just get a OnePlus or Nexus or something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or a Exynos S7.
Binary100100 said:
Or a Exynos S7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly this. except for some reason I thought exynos variants are lacking certain bands/features on American networks. could be wrong.
xVermicide said:
if you want root and customizability and roms, just don't get this phone. you will be very disappointed with the performance once you root and it gets so much worse with Xposed. not worth it at all, you will have better performance and speed from a 4 year old phone that has an unlocked bootloader and strong development. I mean my Nexus 5 (from 2012) had better performance than my rooted S7. it sounds like you do want roms, and if you want roms then AOSP/Cyanogenmod is the way to go. there will probably never be any AOSP or CM ROM on the QC S7/E so you're better off getting an older galaxy model that does have a great development community and unlocked bootloader. or just get a OnePlus or Nexus or something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Binary100100 said:
Or a Exynos S7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
xVermicide said:
exactly this. except for some reason I thought exynos variants are lacking certain bands/features on American networks. could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very helpful inputs guys, thank you! If I were to be honest with myself, I don't want AOSP/CM/Lineage, especially on a Samsung phone, so unlocked bootloader is not a deal breaker for me. However, I think root is cool for me for doing some SystemUI tweaks, Xposed and etc. Exynos was an option I was exploring, but lack of warranty, no Samsung Pay, and the price are enough to keep me at bay. I think I just need to put my big boy pants on and try to use a phone without rooting it. Something I have yet to do in EVER using an Android phone since about 10 years ago, and I have never ever used or bought an iCrap... I mean... an iPhone !
ProFragger said:
Very helpful inputs guys, thank you! If I were to be honest with myself, I don't want AOSP/CM/Lineage, especially on a Samsung phone, so unlocked bootloader is not a deal breaker for me. However, I think root is cool for me for doing some SystemUI tweaks, Xposed and etc. Exynos was an option I was exploring, but lack of warranty, no Samsung Pay, and the price are enough to keep me at bay. I think I just need to put my big boy pants on and try to use a phone without rooting it. Something I have yet to do in EVER using an Android phone since about 10 years ago, and I have never ever used or bought an iCrap... I mean... an iPhone !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Get a One+ 3T good development and really nice phone if you want root. Root is dead on Samsung phones and so are ROMs.
So by reading thru this thread, I assume having a T-mobile S7E (G935T) rooting is pointless and really not available the way I'm used to it coming from a Note 4. That's kind of a bummer... I've been using Android and have always had ROOT and all the goodies that come with it. And I recently starting really enjoying my Note 4 with all the cool development in Note 7 ported roms oh well... I wonder if the S7E is enough of an upgrade to keep my interest as stock?
I see there is a G935U firmware, but that seems a bit hit and miss? But I'm just starting to read up on all this... :good:
ShrekOpher said:
Get a One+ 3T good development and really nice phone if you want root. Root is dead on Samsung phones and so are ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Believe me bud, if Oneplus 5 or even 3T had an SD Card, I'd already have that phone, but thanks for your wisdom !
Araltd said:
So by reading thru this thread, I assume having a T-mobile S7E (G935T) rooting is pointless and really not available the way I'm used to it coming from a Note 4. That's kind of a bummer... I've been using Android and have always had ROOT and all the goodies that come with it. And I recently starting really enjoying my Note 4 with all the cool development in Note 7 ported roms oh well... I wonder if the S7E is enough of an upgrade to keep my interest as stock?
I see there is a G935U firmware, but that seems a bit hit and miss? But I'm just starting to read up on all this... :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You and I both man... The last few years, I have lived off the mercy of T-Mobile and their BLs being unlocked. But Samsung sure done them all in ! Even the International unlocked ones disable Samsung Pay (forever, mind you!) if Knox is tripped, which I believe it is, when rooted and TWRP'd.
As I understand it,
Android pay / Samsung pay is why they frown on rooting now. I can understand it, though I don't agree with it.
The first time someone's financial information is compromised, and they've ever used one of the "pay" methods, on a rooted device the pr nightmare that would ensue would make the note 7 fiasco look like child's play.
"Samsung unsecured device compromises persons credit card information today, while Apple is still secure" I can see the headline.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7E

New to S7... Why are there only 3 roms posted here?

Is there something I'm missing?
Sammy locked the Bootloader
Yup. This is the most highly sought after device with almost no developer support.
If you wanted root then you should get pretty much any other phone.
if you change the Android Code, you have to share it.
ahq1216 said:
Sammy locked the Bootloader
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct me if I am wrong, but according to the Android Platform User Agreement (I think), if you change the Android Code, you have to share it. Or some form of developers open source agreement. Correct?
So there has been no root accomplished whatsoever on the T-Mobile S7? If that's true, then I'm hanging on to my Note 7 and selling the S7E.
Binary100100 said:
Yup. This is the most highly sought after device with almost no developer support.
If you wanted root then you should get pretty much any other phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then what is the post in your signature about?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/ve...sed-unroot-t3411039/post67605246#post67605246
And what's the deal with the engineering bootloader?
http://www.theandroidsoul.com/root-t-mobile-s7-edge-engineering-bootloader/
Looks like S7 has had an unlocked bootloader with this for a while... Still very confused as to why there are no roms here.
unkellsam said:
Then what is the post in your signature about?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/ve...sed-unroot-t3411039/post67605246#post67605246
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
unkellsam said:
And what's the deal with the engineering bootloader?
http://www.theandroidsoul.com/root-t-mobile-s7-edge-engineering-bootloader/
Looks like S7 has had an unlocked bootloader with this for a while... Still very confused as to why there are no roms here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suppose you really need to read a bit more.
For all Qualcomm US devices the bootloader is LOCKED.
This is well known and documented. Root is possible only with an engineering kernel. The page that you referenced is inaccurate as it referenced an engineering bootloader. It's actually an engineering boot.img file that the writer mistook for a bootloader. Again... it's an engineering kernel not engineering bootloader.
unkellsam said:
So there has been no root accomplished whatsoever on the T-Mobile S7? If that's true, then I'm hanging on to my Note 7 and selling the S7E.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is, but it's very unstable. Phone tends to lag and overheat due to the (something i dont understand).
serendipityguy said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but according to the Android Platform User Agreement (I think), if you change the Android Code, you have to share it. Or some form of developers open source agreement. Correct?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, yes and no. Parts fall under GPL, and parts of what Samsung uses to enable full functionality of the phone are NOT. The fact that they use special digital signatures in the boot process to prevent loading unsigned code is totally up to them (i.e. its all the stuff that happens before "android" starts...
sbaeder said:
Well, yes and no. Parts fall under GPL, and parts of what Samsung uses to enable full functionality of the phone are NOT. The fact that they use special digital signatures in the boot process to prevent loading unsigned code is totally up to them (i.e. its all the stuff that happens before "android" starts...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But arn't there other S7 roms from Verizon, AT&T and Sprint having developers pushing out custom kernels? Is this something that T-mobile can release but won't?
Google gives/updates the OS, Samsung gives the S7 hardware / Updated OS - Patches the OS & then gives to the Carriers (Tmobile) and they plug in their hellware (Bloatware), surely they have the source or the ability to modify the stock rom when updates are being pushed out to the carriers.
When a New Stock drops, it is the phone carriers who modify the kernel's, boot animation, build property, and sets their modems and such . . . Not Samsung because they would not be want to push out the kernels, modems, build property, boot animation & custom roms for each phone carrier in each region of each county. So lf what I am thinking that our phone carriers developers are lame ducks....
Going the other way on this, how does Sam Mobile play into this? how is it that they are able to host the roms on their servers? Arn't there any links from Samsung to host the roms?
Please if I am wrong, please someone correct me.
It's complicated...
Samsung locked the bootloaders on all US (Qualcomm) S7 but left the bootloader unlocked on international (Exynos) roms and some international Qualcomm roms.
This sucks and hopefully is not repeated on the upcoming S8 which may be Qualcomm only.
Last summer, an engineering bootloader was leaked and a group of people here got a root that uses the engineering bootloader. It's not perfect, as it forces people to use a non-production kernel. More people here came up with settings to get the most out of that kernel.
Right now we are in the middle of the transition to Android 7 and the engineering root doesn't work with it presently. Until a solution for that is reached
At the same time, the international rom deveopment has gone smoothly with over a dozen roms updated and a few tweaked kernels. The Exynos phone itself seems to be faster and with better battery life (but worse reception) compared to a standard qualcomm. Rooted with a custom kernel on both, it's like night and day how much better the exynos performance is. Some people ported T-mobile wifi calling and Volte (through CSC settings) to the international version, so for a certain user (of which I am one), the ideal root solution is to run a full speed exynos 930F on Android 7 and retain t-mobile functionality.
unkellsam said:
Is there something I'm missing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung blows
T-Mobile and Samsung both ****ed up around this time
Sent from my SM-G935T using XDA-Developers Legacy app
fracture8 said:
T-Mobile and Samsung both ****ed up around this time
Sent from my SM-G935T using XDA-Developers Legacy app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear you.
Im gonna pay off the half of the phone in 7 months and then will jump ship to a one plus 4/5 when its released.
So much wasted potential
I would get the G935F.
serendipityguy said:
But arn't there other S7 roms from Verizon, AT&T and Sprint having developers pushing out custom kernels? Is this something that T-mobile can release but won't?
Google gives/updates the OS, Samsung gives the S7 hardware / Updated OS - Patches the OS & then gives to the Carriers (Tmobile) and they plug in their hellware (Bloatware), surely they have the source or the ability to modify the stock rom when updates are being pushed out to the carriers.
When a New Stock drops, it is the phone carriers who modify the kernel's, boot animation, build property, and sets their modems and such . . . Not Samsung because they would not be want to push out the kernels, modems, build property, boot animation & custom roms for each phone carrier in each region of each county. So lf what I am thinking that our phone carriers developers are lame ducks....
Going the other way on this, how does Sam Mobile play into this? how is it that they are able to host the roms on their servers? Arn't there any links from Samsung to host the roms?
Please if I am wrong, please someone correct me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile and Samsung keep playing around. I'm really hoping the Note 8 comes with an unlocked boot-loader or this may be there strategy going forward for the US.
rp3 said:
It's complicated...
Samsung locked the bootloaders on all US (Qualcomm) S7 but left the bootloader unlocked on international (Exynos) roms and some international Qualcomm roms.
This sucks and hopefully is not repeated on the upcoming S8 which may be Qualcomm only.
Last summer, an engineering bootloader was leaked and a group of people here got a root that uses the engineering bootloader. It's not perfect, as it forces people to use a non-production kernel. More people here came up with settings to get the most out of that kernel.
Right now we are in the middle of the transition to Android 7 and the engineering root doesn't work with it presently. Until a solution for that is reached
At the same time, the international rom deveopment has gone smoothly with over a dozen roms updated and a few tweaked kernels. The Exynos phone itself seems to be faster and with better battery life (but worse reception) compared to a standard qualcomm. Rooted with a custom kernel on both, it's like night and day how much better the exynos performance is. Some people ported T-mobile wifi calling and Volte (through CSC settings) to the international version, so for a certain user (of which I am one), the ideal root solution is to run a full speed exynos 930F on Android 7 and retain t-mobile functionality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was dead set on getting the Note 7 but after the fiasco i settled for the S7 edge. the G935F also has all the bands that t-Mobiel uses so we get band 12 as well. The issue with getting the G935F is trying to buy online as it has to be imported and still get insurance and so forth. Bought from B&H photo ( aa reputable US store) for insurance and good support. The g935F turned out to be a good gamble. As long as you wait there was alot of development. Since alot of us T-Mobile guys hopped over we were able to get Volte and wificalling ported over via various CSC edits and other workarounds. So we get alot of custom roms and T-Mobile support as well. Only issue you have to root and loose Samsung pay but for me that a okay lol.

Favorite xt1765 ROM and why

I am just wondering what you guys(or girls) favourite custom ROMs are for the Perry xt1765 and why?
Or do you prefer stock and why?
I'm currently running Resurrection Remix and I do really like the look and all the customization and the smooth and snappiness of the ROM overall, but I made several mistakes during the install and can't get it unencrypted.
So I was planning on reinstalling RR but the only other ROM I've used is the stock ROM.
So basically, I'm wondering if there's something better for me or more my style.
I just don't have the time or patience to read the info about all the ROMs and install them for a few days to test them out.
Once again, when giving your opinion, please go into detail about WHY you like that ROM so much.
Thanks in advance
:good::fingers-crossed:
AesopRock127 said:
Hi I'm not sure if this should be in the questions and answers section or this section. Since it's a discussion, and this section had the word discussion in it, I am assuming this is the correct section....
Basically, I am just wondering what you guys(or girls) favourite custom ROMs are for the Perry xt1765 and why?
Or do you prefer stock and why?
I'm currently running Resurrection Remix and I do really like the look and all the customization and the smooth and snappiness of the ROM overall, but I made several mistakes during the install and can't get it unencrypted.
So I was planning on reinstalling RR but the only other ROM I've used is the stock ROM.
So basically, I'm wondering if there's something better for me or more my style.
I just don't have the time or patience to read the info about all the ROMs and install them for a few days to test them out.
Once again, when giving your opinion, please go into detail about WHY you like that ROM so much.
Thanks in advance
:good::fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My preference for virtually every Android gizmo that I own/owned (dozens) is stock, xposed framework (if supported), and a few essential modules. Why be that you may ask? First - I only nab devices that have near AOSP stock rom or a well established stand-in. An unlockable bootloader is absolute table stakes; have no interest in fighting with vendor imposed restrictions. Then there's stability and functionality. Typically everything just works with stock. I'm not into perpetual beta testing everyday commodities. Life is too short to be doinking around with ROM idiosyncrasies and developers who are unable (or insufficiently skilled) to adapt generic ROMs for specific hardware. Might sound crass but reflects pragmatic priorities and limited discretionary time. I prefer to use my gizmos, not manage them.
tl;dr: pick your poison wisely.
Davey126 said:
I prefer to use by gizmos, not manage them.
tl;dr: pick your poison wisely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wise words my friend.
Davey126 said:
My preference for virtually every Android gizmo that I own/owned (dozens) is stock, xposed framework (if supported), and a few essential modules.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First off, thanks for your thorough and well thought answer. I actually know this about you from browsing other threads. Secondly, I'm curious what you consider to be essential Xposed modules? I have Xposed installed but find it hard to pick through and find the gems in the largely useless (to me at least) download section. Been experimenting with different custom rooms and while I still really like the RR one, I'm starting to feel like I may be happier in stock as well, maybe just a debloated one. So although I didn't intend this with my OP, I'm interested what you or anyone considers to be essential modules on Xposed or even Magisk. Thanks for your opinion
Sent from my Motorola XT1765 using XDA Labs
AesopRock127 said:
First off, thanks for your thorough and well thought answer. I actually know this about you from browsing other threads. Secondly, I'm curious what you consider to be essential Xposed modules? I have Xposed installed but find it hard to pick through and find the gems in the largely useless (to me at least) download section. Been experimenting with different custom rooms and while I still really like the RR one, I'm starting to feel like I may be happier in stock as well, maybe just a debloated one. So although I didn't intend this with my OP, I'm interested what you or anyone considers to be essential modules on Xposed or even Magisk. Thanks for your opinion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like to keep things simple and functional; reliability is a top priority. I also demand full control over my gizmo's while rarely using those capabilities. Could care less about theming and other eye candy.
My essentials:
- AOSP based ROM
- TWRP
- Root manager (SuperSU or Magisk)
- Kernel manager (typically EX)
- Nova launcher
- Xposed framework w/gravitybox and edge
- Greenify w/xposed (used sparingly)
- SD Maid
- Adguard
Of course I have dozens of high quality apps that are universal along with a handful that are device specific. The only Magisk modules I use are those that are absolutely necessary for device compatibility. I do use other Xposed modules (eg: Wifi password; OwnOrientation) but typically only where needed.
Davey126 said:
I like to keep things simple and functional; reliability is a top priority. I also demand full control over my gizmo's while rarely using those capabilities. Could care less about theming and other eye candy.
My essentials:
- AOSP based ROM
- TWRP
- Root manager (SuperSU or Magisk)
- Kernel manager (typically EX)
- Nova launcher
- Xposed framework w/gravitybox and edge
- Greenify w/xposed (used sparingly)
- SD Maid
- Adguard
Of course I have dozens of high quality apps that are universal along with a handful that are device specific. The only Magisk modules I use are those that are absolutely necessary for device compatibility. I do use other Xposed modules (eg: Wifi password; OwnOrientation) but typically only where needed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I see the benefit of this.
I'm starting to agree more and more.
You get the stabability of the stock rom with the customization of a custom rom with gravitybox.
I personally dislike most pie and edge type apps and my preferred launcher is adw EX but besides that I can really see your point.
Sent from my Motorola XT1765 using XDA Labs
AesopRock127 said:
I am just wondering what you guys(or girls) favourite custom ROMs are for the Perry xt1765 and why?
Or do you prefer stock and why?
I'm currently running Resurrection Remix and I do really like the look and all the customization and the smooth and snappiness of the ROM overall, but I made several mistakes during the install and can't get it unencrypted.
So I was planning on reinstalling RR but the only other ROM I've used is the stock ROM.
So basically, I'm wondering if there's something better for me or more my style.
I just don't have the time or patience to read the info about all the ROMs and install them for a few days to test them out.
Once again, when giving your opinion, please go into detail about WHY you like that ROM so much.
Thanks in advance
:good::fingers-crossed:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, none of the nougat roms are great.
Lineage, Dot, RR all suffer from serious SD failures and crashes because of the USB bug when you plug it into the computer.
All the nougat roms, including stock, have a real serious problem with calls and texts coming through. I've tried ALL the roms and even made the XT1765 stock rom, and my phone just will not ring every time someone calls it. It goes into a weird sleep and just won't shake itself out unless i make a call/text.
Hold out for Oreo.
Articul8Madness said:
Honestly, none of the nougat roms are great.
Lineage, Dot, RR all suffer from serious SD failures and crashes because of the USB bug when you plug it into the computer.
All the nougat roms, including stock, have a real serious problem with calls and texts coming through. I've tried ALL the roms and even made the XT1765 stock rom, and my phone just will not ring every time someone calls it. It goes into a weird sleep and just won't shake itself out unless i make a call/text.
Hold out for Oreo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have not noticed any of these issues on stock or RR except for out of state texts seem slow.... Take awhile to come in. Besides that though I do have to agree N is nothing special
Sent from my Motorola XT1765 using XDA Labs
Articul8Madness said:
Honestly, none of the nougat roms are great.
Lineage, Dot, RR all suffer from serious SD failures and crashes because of the USB bug when you plug it into the computer.
All the nougat roms, including stock, have a real serious problem with calls and texts coming through. I've tried ALL the roms and even made the XT1765 stock rom, and my phone just will not ring every time someone calls it. It goes into a weird sleep and just won't shake itself out unless i make a call/text.
Hold out for Oreo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have two E4s in the family associated with Verizon. One totally stock; not rooted/unlocked; routinely takes OTAs. Other is BL unlocked, rooted, running stock 7.1 ROM from late 2017. Neither exhibit the symptoms you describe. Actually, quite the opposite. Rock solid performers.
Why would you think Oreo is going to solve your problems which are likely the result of heavy tinkering and incomplete restoration attempts?
AesopRock127 said:
I have not noticed any of these issues on stock or RR except for out of state texts seem slow.... Take awhile to come in. Besides that though I do have to agree N is nothing special
Sent from my Motorola XT1765 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you plug the phone into the computer via USB, you have to fight to get it to accept if you're doing transfers. While you can drag and drop files to your device via PC, you cannot delete anything on the phone via PC or transfer anything from device to PC. That is a SERIOUS BUG that creates the hassle of taking the battery out to retrieve the SD card to put it into a SD adapter and into the slot if your pc has it. Not a dealbreaker, but terribly inconvenient on the model since you have to take the battery out every time.
---------- Post added at 03:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:57 PM ----------
Davey126 said:
Have two E4s in the family associated with Verizon. One totally stock; not rooted/unlocked; routinely takes OTAs. Other is BL unlocked, rooted, running stock 7.1 ROM from late 2017. Neither exhibit the symptoms you describe. Actually, quite the opposite. Rock solid performers.
Why would you think Oreo is going to solve your problems which are likely the result of heavy tinkering and incomplete restoration attempts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have 2 E4s in the family associated with MetroPCS. Now we're over to TMobile, devices are unlocked straight from Metro. Both are rooted/bootloader unlocked. Only one took that March OTA (the significant other's) and it was a ***** undoing the damage on their phone that caused with the root.
Since I unlocked the bootloaders on these variants, stock or custom OS we miss phone calls. It does weird things where text messages will not come in unless you send one out first. It also will not ring once its sleep for so long; I literally have to make a phone call and "activate it" to get it ringing. Many people over the last 2-3 months keep telling me they've called and it DOESN'T RING on their end. I've also called folks and heard no ringing.
You CANNOT compare the Verizon variant to any other since you can't do squat with it but maybe root. Also, verizon always seem to have the better phones that hold up NO MATTER WHAT. Hard price to pay when you can't really do nothing with it.
Metro's variant has been a pain in the ass since day 1. And from what I've seen on here so have the Sprint ones. I don't like stock on this phone at all, even though I made a stock rom which was necessary to unlock it down the row, but this model sucks.
---------- Post added at 03:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 PM ----------
Davey126 said:
Why would you think Oreo is going to solve your problems which are likely the result of heavy tinkering and incomplete restoration attempts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe once Squid2 gets the device trees properly some of the isms will go away.
Also, if unlocking the bootloader is "heavy tinkering" then what are we doing on here? I do complete restoration attempts just fine, these and other problems started the minute the bootloader was unlocked and not before. And on the Metro variant, which is a POS, well, guess it was coming. Won't be getting another phone from them, tell you that much.
Articul8Madness said:
When you plug the phone into the computer via USB, you have to fight to get it to accept if you're doing transfers. While you can drag and drop files to your device via PC, you cannot delete anything on the phone via PC or transfer anything from device to PC. That is a SERIOUS BUG that creates the hassle of taking the battery out to retrieve the SD card to put it into a SD adapter and into the slot if your pc has it. Not a dealbreaker, but terribly inconvenient on the model since you have to take the battery out every time.
---------- Post added at 03:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:57 PM ----------
Have 2 E4s in the family associated with MetroPCS. Now we're over to TMobile, devices are unlocked straight from Metro. Both are rooted/bootloader unlocked. Only one took that March OTA (the significant other's) and it was a ***** undoing the damage on their phone that caused with the root.
Since I unlocked the bootloaders on these variants, stock or custom OS we miss phone calls. It does weird things where text messages will not come in unless you send one out first. It also will not ring once its sleep for so long; I literally have to make a phone call and "activate it" to get it ringing. Many people over the last 2-3 months keep telling me they've called and it DOESN'T RING on their end. I've also called folks and heard no ringing. .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to be contrary but I'm on metropcs and I have literally none of these issues.
Not on RR and not on fully updated stock.
Not sure what happened with yours and maybe I just got lucky but the only thing that I couldn't do on fully up to date stock was install xposed.
I think that was because you need a patched boot IMG to get it running not sure.
Like I said before sometimes out of state texts take a while to come in but I'm talking 5 minutes later and not activated by a phone call like in your case.
My phone connects to my computers just fine with any old cable.
Can fastboot or transfer files to and from SD or internal and delete as well with no issues.
Maybe mines newer and they fixed it somehow because I've only had mine about six months but only started unlocking the bootloader a few weeks ago
Sounds like a serious PITA for you my friend I've been a loyal metropcs customer since they first came to my state and I've only had one problem phone from them so I'm sorry you've had such a crqp experience but believe me they either fixed the problem or like @Davey126 said its more likely something botched.
Do they have twrp flashed on them?
Are they encrypted or not?
Just curious
Ive never had to take my SD card out I can even transfer files in TWRP mount section...
Articul8Madness said:
You CANNOT compare the Verizon variant to any other since you can't do squat with it but maybe root. Also, verizon always seem to have the better phones that hold up NO MATTER WHAT. Hard price to pay when you can't really do nothing with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did no such thing. Our E4s are associated with Verizon but not tied to that provider. As noted, one is bootloader unlocked with all of the associated magical powers (ooo!). Second remains locked and unrooted by choice; like 'dem OTAs. One does not have to purchase Verizon's crippled handsets to leverage their service. As for "better phones" (cough) your E4 hardware and mine are virtually identical. No more, no less.
Articul8Madness said:
Also, if unlocking the bootloader is "heavy tinkering" then what are we doing on here? I do complete restoration attempts just fine, these and other problems started the minute the bootloader was unlocked and not before. And on the Metro variant, which is a POS, well, guess it was coming. Won't be getting another phone from them, tell you that much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have no idea what transpired after unlocking but whatever happened your experiences don't mirror those of others.
AesopRock127 said:
Not to be contrary but I'm on metropcs and I have literally none of these issues.
Not on RR and not on fully updated stock.
Not sure what happened with yours and maybe I just got lucky but the only thing that I couldn't do on fully up to date stock was install xposed.
I think that was because you need a patched boot IMG to get it running not sure.
Like I said before sometimes out of state texts take a while to come in but I'm talking 5 minutes later and not activated by a phone call like in your case.
My phone connects to my computers just fine with any old cable.
Can fastboot or transfer files to and from SD or internal and delete as well with no issues.
Maybe mines newer and they fixed it somehow because I've only had mine about six months but only started unlocking the bootloader a few weeks ago
Sounds like a serious PITA for you my friend I've been a loyal metropcs customer since they first came to my state and I've only had one problem phone from them so I'm sorry you've had such a crqp experience but believe me they either fixed the problem or like @Davey126 said its more likely something botched.
Do they have twrp flashed on them?
Are they encrypted or not?
Just curious
Ive never had to take my SD card out I can even transfer files in TWRP mount section...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of Metro users on here reported about the transfer issues using custom roms in the approprpiate threads. So that isn't isolated. Maybe it's the batch of phones perhaps. I know running DotOS or RR specifically, the phone would run, but if I rebooted it would bootloop. Considering I rarely rebooted once on, that was something I noticed after having to pull the SD card out. But no big thing - Lineage was my go to OS anyway, and had no probs with that.
Yes, both phones have twrp flashed on them. No, not encrypted.
These aren't the first Metro phones I've had. Had the LGL70 before and the LGOptimusL9. No probs with those until years after having them. With the E4's, its been struggle since day one (which wasn't a total loss because I wound up writing guides and really studying this variant).
---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 PM ----------
Davey126 said:
Did no such thing. Our E4s are associated with Verizon but not tied to that provider. As noted, one is bootloader unlocked with all of the associated magical powers (ooo!). Second remains locked and unrooted by choice; like 'dem OTAs. One does not have to purchase Verizon's crippled handsets to leverage their service. As for "better phones" (cough) your E4 hardware and mine are virtually identical. No more, no less.
Have no idea what transpired after unlocking but whatever happened your experiences don't mirror those of others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In fairness, I did get the phones from an authorized retailer and not corporate themselves. Maybe the phones were duds from the start, but what is so weird is that they came from 2 different metropcs' stores about a month apart from each other.
Can't say Davey. But if you read the Moto forums, the Metro folks got more than their fair share of probs. I've always loved a Moto phone, but the way Lenovo's been acting since acquiring them, they may be intentionally sending out lemons. I make my phone usable, but at the 3 month mark its time for another one and with the E4 being cut from Oreo because of the premature release of the E5, I don't know if I want to stick with Moto.
My Metro service sucked. Switched back to TMobile just from the last week of service being slowed to a crawl and being non-existent, even on my Iphone SE. After calling and complaining about it they said to take my business elsewhere, so I took it to their head company, who TMO says they don't get priority on service as a MVNO.
I was stuck with Verizon for 7 years after they bought PrimeCo. Never liked them - they locked my Moto Razr down so tough it was ridiculous and all I wanted was RINGTONES, custom RINGTONES on the thing. The one and only time I took an unlocked phone to them S4Mini, they said it wouldn't work on their network (which was crap). But their phones do hold up when cotton and corn won't, sadly.
Articul8Madness said:
A lot of Metro users on here reported about the transfer issues using custom roms in the approprpiate threads. So that isn't isolated. Maybe it's the batch of phones perhaps. I know running DotOS or RR specifically, the phone would run, but if I rebooted it would bootloop. Considering I rarely rebooted once on, that was something I noticed after having to pull the SD card out. But no big thing - Lineage was my go to OS anyway, and had no probs with that.
Yes, both phones have twrp flashed on them. No, not encrypted.
These aren't the first Metro phones I've had. Had the LGL70 before and the LGOptimusL9. No probs with those until years after having them. With the E4's, its been struggle since day one (which wasn't a total loss because I wound up writing guides and really studying this variant).
---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 PM ----------
In fairness, I did get the phones from an authorized retailer and not corporate themselves. Maybe the phones were duds from the start, but what is so weird is that they came from 2 different metropcs' stores about a month apart from each other.
Can't say Davey. But if you read the Moto forums, the Metro folks got more than their fair share of probs. I've always loved a Moto phone, but the way Lenovo's been acting since acquiring them, they may be intentionally sending out lemons. I make my phone usable, but at the 3 month mark its time for another one and with the E4 being cut from Oreo because of the premature release of the E5, I don't know if I want to stick with Moto.
My Metro service sucked. Switched back to TMobile just from the last week of service being slowed to a crawl and being non-existent, even on my Iphone SE. After calling and complaining about it they said to take my business elsewhere, so I took it to their head company, who TMO says they don't get priority on service as a MVNO.
I was stuck with Verizon for 7 years after they bought PrimeCo. Never liked them - they locked my Moto Razr down so tough it was ridiculous and all I wanted was RINGTONES, custom RINGTONES on the thing. The one and only time I took an unlocked phone to them S4Mini, they said it wouldn't work on their network (which was crap). But their phones do hold up when cotton and corn won't, sadly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got to agree with you there....
Difficult phones provide the opportunity to learn which is always a good thing, albiet frustrating at times.
MetroPCS just announced a rebranding to Metro by TMobile.
I was under the impression they used the same exact network since when TMobile bought Metro they gave me a free phone because my old one would no longer get a signal when they moved to TMobile network....
At least that's how they described it to me at the store.
But you notice a difference on TMobile over Metro?
I personally have no problems here in NH, works all over my state and the LTE literally screams, i sometimes even get a better speed test then my Xfinity.
The only issue I've had so far on my current setup is I no longer am notified of voicemails and visual voicemail won't load....
Not sure why that is but I can still check voicemails manually...
Is this an issue anyone has run into?
If so, anyone have a solution?
Was considering stopping at Metro and seeing if they could help, maybe it needs another Metro app or something but they will just tell me not to tinker with my phone and refuse to help me.
They are pretty ignorant of anything not involving selling a phone or normal everyday setup.
For a corporate store, they sure lack in the support department....
Articul8Madness said:
In fairness, I did get the phones from an authorized retailer and not corporate themselves. Maybe the phones were duds from the start, but what is so weird is that they came from 2 different metropcs' stores about a month apart from each other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never purchase carrier aligned/branded phones. I seek out the multi-service variant (eg: XT1768), wait for a sale and then add the (unlocked/rooted) device to whatever service I happen to be using at the time. I have neither the time nor patience to dink around with balky firmware. I also expect to be the master of my devices with no restrictions beyond those imposed by the HW itself. That requirement largely determines what gizmos make the short list.
AesopRock127 said:
I got to agree with you there....
Difficult phones provide the opportunity to learn which is always a good thing, albiet frustrating at times.
MetroPCS just announced a rebranding to Metro by TMobile.
I was under the impression they used the same exact network since when TMobile bought Metro they gave me a free phone because my old one would no longer get a signal when they moved to TMobile network....
At least that's how they described it to me at the store.
But you notice a difference on TMobile over Metro?
I personally have no problems here in NH, works all over my state and the LTE literally screams, i sometimes even get a better speed test then my Xfinity.
The only issue I've had so far on my current setup is I no longer am notified of voicemails and visual voicemail won't load....
Not sure why that is but I can still check voicemails manually...
Is this an issue anyone has run into?
If so, anyone have a solution?
Was considering stopping at Metro and seeing if they could help, maybe it needs another Metro app or something but they will just tell me not to tinker with my phone and refuse to help me.
They are pretty ignorant of anything not involving selling a phone or normal everyday setup.
For a corporate store, they sure lack in the support department....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "rebranding" is because Tmobile just bought Sprint, and so from what Tmobile said, they need to "reprioritize" their service from their top tier GSM/CDMA down to their MVNOs. I'm gonna guess this is to get ready for the conversion to 5G, since TMO confirmed to me their users get first dibs on service, then Sprint, then the MVNO's, since while they own Metro and Simple Mobile, they also "lease" airtime from them for service.
Don't get me started at how messy this is, considering Tmobile's computer systems are always down, and something as simple as getting a text to remind me to pay the bill or confirmation I've paid NEVER HAPPENS NOW.
There is a difference over service between Metro and TMO - depending on where you're at in the country you can definitely tell. Never got full LTE on Metro instead H+ barely, but never had problems with TMO in that department. Calls on that last week no matter what phone with Metro...service just would cease to exist.
I always got VM's on Metro but it wouldn't ring and go straight to VM but Visual Voicemail NEVER EVER WORKED, especially since I felt punished because I wouldn't update my data to unlimited.
And yes, their people are ignorant of everything, but then they can be considering they franchise. Their tech support, albeit good English speakers, sucks in comparison to TMO.
I had a situation with TMO where I called and paid the bill over the phone but their new system lost the payment even though it showed I paid, it didn't credit to the account. TMO automatically credited it for me and escalated to see what's wrong with the line. Metro would have NEVER done that. EVER. They wouldn't even credit me a SIM card when one I bought didn't work - made me pay 20 bucks for a replacement because their system couldn't process it. No thanks.
---------- Post added at 07:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 PM ----------
Davey126 said:
I never purchase carrier aligned/branded phones. I seek out the multi-service variant (eg: XT1768), wait for a sale and then add the (unlocked/rooted) device to whatever service I happen to be using at the time. I have neither the time nor patience to dink around with balky firmware. I also expect to be the master of my devices with no restrictions beyond those imposed by the HW itself. That requirement largely determines what gizmos make the short list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't have that option when I got service. I hadn't had service for 8 years. Normally I get factory unlocked used phones from ebay as my personal play tinkering devices, but an actual phone to talk with, it was a budget buy and for 50 bucks and being Moto didn't feel it was going to be a clunker. Normally I have to scout and negotiate for the international phones I like, but as Samsung is proving, just because its not carrier aligned doesn't mean the manufacturer won't lock the phone down.
Articul8Madness said:
Normally I have to scout and negotiate for the international phones I like, but as Samsung is proving, just because its not carrier aligned doesn't mean the manufacturer won't lock the phone down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Never said that. A bit of upfront research makes all the difference. Been doing this for nearly 15 years; haven't bricked a handset yet and never experienced the boatload of woes others report. My phones just work.
Davey126 said:
Never said that. A bit of upfront research makes all the difference. Been doing this for nearly 15 years; haven't bricked a handset yet and never experienced the boatload of woes others report. My phones just work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Never said you said that. I was just pointing out the hard fact about Samsung locking down phones post S7. I been tinkering with phones since my Verizon branded Razr3. Ain't bricked a phone yet that couldn't be unbricked, lol. Had some I loved, had some I hated.

Categories

Resources