Related
Hi XDA-Samsung Users,
I've been a member of XDA since Jan last year. I went from owning a Nexus One to a Samsung Galaxy S i9000. The reason for the change was for the better specs and superior hardware of the Samsung Galaxy.
The phone is an incredible piece of machinery, but is severely hampered by the modifications that Samsung makes to the Android OS. I admit that the codec support within TouchWiz is impressive, but too much of the core framework of the phone is inefficient and sluggish.
Even using the latest release of unofficial firmware Samsung, Android 2.2.1 (JPY), there is still the occasional hang and the missing RAM (which is there somewhere, but not for user applications).
Samsung is mostly to blame, but there is also a quality control element that Google should be responsible for.
I have prepared an open letter that I sent to Android via Google Press and then forwarded on to Samsung for their reference. This were all through publicly available channels so will have to filter through customer service centers and the like.
I'm not expecting much, Google appears to use Amazon's customer service approach, "No customer service is good customer service".
But would like to post it here to hopefully get it out into the wilderness.
I tweeted it here http://twitter.com/#!/ibproud/status/27528781828722688
and would appreciate if you agreed with the content to retweet it. Hopefully it should give it a bit more weight.
It would be interesting to get the communities feedback on how mature they believe Android is.
Do they need to keep trying to make everyone happy or can they start to use the weight of their OS to get manufacturers to align the user experience?
Dear Android Team,
I am writing this letter to air my frustrations and to hopefully get some peace of mind that your strategy for Android will resolve some of the main issues plaguing the platform.
I have now been with Android for over 12 months. I used to be an iPhone user, but couldn’t stand the walled garden that Apple put me in. I couldn’t download directly to the phone, replace the messaging app or sync wirelessly. I went to Android because I wanted the freedom to use my phone more as a desktop replacement than as a phone/mp3 player.
When I joined the Android family (January 2010), I started with the Google Nexus One. I was so keen to get into the Android community I didn’t even wait for it to be on sale in Australia to get it, thus I hit eBay and bought it outright.
I was very pleased with the platform but could still see a few rough edges around the Operating System. It had the usability I was looking for but was lacking the polish I had grown use to with Apple. There was good news on the horizon with an Éclair update that would give the already beautiful phone a nudge in the right direction. As I was in Australia and the phone wasn’t here yet, I had to push the update through myself, after seeing how easy this was and getting the feeling of being a little phone hacker, I was hooked, I started preaching Android to the masses. Australia is still building momentum for the platform and it’s taking some time. Most of the major carriers stock between 4-6 Android devices, most of which are low end or outdated in the overseas markets.
I follow all the key players in the industry through Twitter and have a majority of Google News trackers picking up articles with android related words. I have also now converted my Wife to Android (HTC Desire Z, also not available in Aus) and I picked up the Samsung Galaxy S and gave my sister the Nexus One. The problem I face now is that I’ve run out of money and can’t go out and buy a new Android phone just to be up to date with the latest Android OS (Gingerbread), this would also be the case for most consumers. The Nexus S is so similar to my current hardware that I must be able to leverage the extra performance from the update.
But alas, we reach the major problem with the platform. Fragmentation. I’m not referring to the Fragmentation of the various app stores and apps available based on different OS versions but more to the Fragmentation of the OS based on the custom skins and manufacturer update cycles. The open platform that is closed at 2 levels, Manufactures and Carriers. I will continue to buy my phones outright as it gives me the freedom and flexibility to upgrade my plans as better ones become available. This always guarantees that I’m free from the bloatware that is preloaded on most Carrier bought phones and free from 1 of the barriers to the true AOSP experience. The next barrier is one that is running rampant in the interwebs rumour mill at the moment and that’s manufacturer updates and in my case I refer to Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy S phones come loaded with Android 2.1, most of them internationally are running Android 2.2 and just recently as select group of the devices is getting Android 2.2.1. This is now a month after Android 2.3 was released. For Samsung I would consider this largely negligent, considering they had the opportunity to work with Google to build a Google Experience Phone (Nexus S). The specs of this phone are so similar to the Galaxy range that a port shouldn’t be too difficult. I understand that there are a lot of constraints and dependencies in the development cycle that could cause delays as well as manufacturers agendas (mostly in unit sales). It is great that Samsung have sold so many devices globally but at a cost of the user experience as well as potential damages to long term retention.
I understand the Open nature of Android and the push to encourage manufacturers to put there own spin on the platform, but Android is getting bigger and more mature, it doesn’t need to be High school girl bending to the whims and peer pressure from the carriers and manufacturers.
There are a team of Devs in Germany who are working to port CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread) to Galaxy S i9000, but these guys have now spent over four months just trying to get through Samsungs drivers. The team didn’t start just to customise the phone but to actually make the phone work properly, I of course refer to the RFS lag issue and Samsungs modification to the framework that slowed it down. The goal of the team is to maximise the potential of the hardware and operating system.
It would be great to see some muscle from Google thrown into the mix, there doesn’t need to be requirements dictated, but maybe ethics encouraged.
There seems to be a few options here:
- Encourage device manufacturers to share their drivers, if it is too sensitive to share at least work with the community to help them do it themselves.
- Start to break down the way the platform is customised so that way the manufactures (Samsung/HTC/Motorola) skin the platform can sit a layer above the core code, thus be a quick implementation/customisation to get their skins working.
- Get each manufacturer to offer the AOSP experience to advanced users. This can be done through an agreement between the user and manufacture that states this will void the warranty and have its own terms and conditions.
- This last one is a long stretch, but how about taking all the manufacturers drivers into a repository, the way Windows do updates. When a new Android version is developed the drivers can be updated or incorporated and be packaged out through the Android SDK.
I may be completely off the mark. I’m not a developer and couldn’t pretend to know what effort is involved at any stage of the process, from building Android to rolling it out into the latest and greatest phone. The one thing I am though is an End User, a person that wants my phone to do more, to get close to being a desktop replacement.
Maybe I’m also being a bit idealistic.
I hope the Android platform continues to flourish and for it to become the Windows of the mobile era.
Sincerely,
Irwin Proud
E: [email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's really an excellent summary. Consider there're even more black sheeps out there. For example Sony Ericcson which ones recently made a statement like Android is their favourite Smartphone OS and left Symbian in Nokias hands.
But we found also the good ones like HTC, which every Manufacturer should have HTC as its Paragon concerning Android Software Development.
Great write-up; I agree 100%
I agree with your post fully, and concur that the Windows Phone 7 model for OS updates is more efficient, and strikes a happy medium between iOS and Android's approach to upgrades. However it is also more restrictive in terms of handset hardware limitations
I suppose the idea is that customers should vote with their wallets and buy from companies with good software and firmware support. The problem with that is a majority of phone users (android or otherwise) are technically savvy enough to take such support into consideration when looking at the latest and greatest fancy phone in a store. We could all buy the Nexus One or Nexus S only, but this too is restrictive to the customer as other phones offer more/different features
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
What Google should do?
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please allow me to politely disagree. Google can do a lot about this and they have done this also. When I say they have done this - I am talking about not having Market application on Android OSes which come on non-phone hardware.
Google should put similar restrictions for loosley coupled skins, upgradable drivers. I had been giving this a lot of thought lately. I will sum up my thoughts with above letter as above:-
i) Device manufacturer skinning - Google should mandate that it should be just another APK within AOSP and users should be given a choice to turn it off.
ii) Device Drivers - Google should mandate there should be a better way of installing device drivers - similar to what we have in MS Windows (MS Windows is an excellent model of how hardware device should be handled - this lead to the exponential growth Windows is enjoying now).
iii) Android OS Update - If Google can achieve the above two, then the choice to upgrade the OS should be at user discretion. Of course, Google should mandate that there is OTA availble as an option. And obviously this OTA would be served by Google, not by device manufacturers. This would also free up time, effort and cash spent by device manufacturers in upgrading the OS.
So this is in the best of interest of everybody.
These restrictions if put in place, would free us all from this phenomena of running outdated OS.
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Thank you so far for the feedback.
poundesville said:
my 2 cents worth:
I agree on your points - but I'd skip the first few paragraphs if I were the one who write the letter. Other than that, thank you for making the effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember most members of XDA would be a cut above the average user. The reason this letter was written the way it was, was to demonstrate that I am a typical end user. Although I would consider myself leaning slightly to the more advanced side I wrote the letter based on a very general experience of the platform, an experience a lot of consumers would go through.
Toss3 said:
What exactly are you hoping to achieve with this letter? Google has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that samsung don't want to update their phones. In these type of situations it's just better to vote with your wallet and buy another manufacturer's phone next time and let Samsung know why you don't want to use their phones in the future.
Writing letters like these is just a waste of time imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What am I trying to achieve with this letter?
I really don’t know, but it helps to just get the thoughts out there.
With approximately 300,000 activations daily, I don’t think Android sees the true reflection of how their platform is received.
When the Galaxy range of phones was released in the US, they would have been seen as the closest thing to an iPhone that non-AT&T customers could get. So sales and activations shouldn’t be seen as the indicator of clever consumers or consumers wanting an open platform, but of consumers who wanted an iPhone but for the various reasons didn’t want to go with AT&T.
Remember: The international Samsung Galaxy is the only Android phone I know of that looks more like an iPhone than any other phone.
What I would really like to see is, that annually google will release a major version of Android. So V1, V2, V3, etc…. the mobile manufacturers commit to any minor or incremental updates per major version. So if Google says they are releasing Android 2.4 then they are saying to the manufacturer that this version will also work on any phone that currently supports v2.1 to v2.3.
As more and more people move to smartphones and tablets, more and more will we see hackers, spammers, botnets and so on attempt to access our devices. If we can’t have the latest updates that close any open holes then our phones become a huge liability.
Pierreken said:
Not sure what ti say on this one. It's true that Samsung has failed on some levels, however I must say that this is the first phone that has allowed me to get to know so much about the internals of the Android OS.
Modifying kernels, ROM's, reading about different file-systems etc... it's not a thing for the common user but I expect the people on this forum to be interested in such things.
Ok, if Samsung had done it right, we may have discussed these things anyway but it would've drawn less attention as people would not be looking for solutions to their problems.
But of course we have to strive to quality for everyone and this letter may just open some people's eyes at both Google and Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really sure if Samsung has failed as such, but have put too much focus on unit sales rather than quality control and great user experience. They started releasing different iterations and modifications to the same phone without considering that each minor tweak to the hardware would mean more resources to develop updates and maintain each device.
I also agree that without Samsung I would know very little about linux filesystems, kernel and custom roms, but shouldn't all of these be more to push the phone above it's limits and not to just get it working properly?
There's nothing wrong with knowing the advanced stuff, however it shouldn't be a necessity.
The problem ironically is that Android is open source. I agree wit the letter above, but I can;t see how you can stop manufacturers doing what they want.
Also the Drivers being proprietary isn't going to change and device manufacturers aren't going to suddenly start releasing their closed driver sources.
Agreed Google should stand up and restrict the Skins to a single APK that can be removed, this would stop all the associated problems with HTC and Samsung skinning too deep in to the OS that it becomes impossible to remove it. The problem with that is, then any manufacturers APK will be installable on any phone. Which is something we know they don't want.
We already know Androids biggest downfall and so does Google. Fragmentation.
I believe once Google has the strong position they want and users demand Android when they buy a new phone, they will start to put their foot down and try to enforce standardisation across Manufacturers, but until they get to what they feel is that point, we're stuck.
Anyway much luck with the letter, I hope someone who matters get's to see it.
Logicalstep
Just wondering if there were any other developers willing to work on the A7 or (more preferably) the A7+. Dexter seems to have quit or lost interest his development permanently on either devices (I think he doesn't have a physical device to work with anymore, but I don't remember where I heard this). The last time he logged on to Tablet Roms was on "04-27-2012", and the last time he logged on to XDA was, well, today actually but he doesn't seem to have any interest in the eLocity forum section. He DID leave us with quite a lot of quality ROMs to work with, especially since the kernel was released for the + in March.
If there aren't any developers willing to work with the A7/A7+ because they don't have a physical device, I would willingly offer remote testing on my A7+ (AKA they give me the compiled ROM(s) or whatever and I try it out and give feedback). It just seems like such a shame to leave both devices with nothing better than a buggy (but still awesome) Honeycomb or a working stock 2.2. ICS seems like it would be doable, again especially since the kernel was released.
I will try to contact the user "chinabull" in the referred link as he seemed like he knew what he was doing when he said "It seems to have all the driver source code we need."
And I have also posted this over at TR.
EDIT- Turns out I can't send PM's to chinabull here, forgot about that. I'll find some other means of communication.
EDIT2- I'm crazy- the message got through; chinabull messaged back! And... he said that he already returned his A7+. So we've got no leads there.
If anyone knows some devs who haven't even heard of the A7/A7+ but might be willing to pick up where Dexter left off, please contact them or let me know so that I can contact them.
6Leinad6 said:
Just wondering if there were any other developers willing to work on the A7 or (more preferably) the A7+. Dexter seems to have quit or lost interest his development permanently on either devices (I think he doesn't have a physical device to work with anymore, but I don't remember where I heard this).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would be willing to pony up CDN $20 towards the purchase of one for a talented (and dedicated) dev to work with. Here in Canada they are available as refurbs for about $90 from places like factorydirect dot c a ..
Anyone else want to donate some dinero ?
Cheers
Sorry for the late(ish) reply, I was out of town.
I don't have any money to donate, sadly, as I just spent it on the A7+...
But, like I said in the OP, if you are willing to work from afar we could do that.
It's a shame it's dead. Prices are around $90 in the US too. With all the china pads out there getting 2nd tier dual core processors with 600 res screens for very little more, it's easy to see why this would go by the wayside. One plus would be built in bluetooth which no china pad has at anything close to this pricepoint, and it probably has a better battery than many of them as well.
We've got someone over at Tablet Roms who will be working on the A7+! He is just waiting on the tablet to arrive.
digidog_A7+ said:
I would be willing to pony up CDN $20 towards the purchase of one for a talented (and dedicated) dev to work with. Here in Canada they are available as refurbs for about $90 from places like factorydirect dot c a ..
Anyone else want to donate some dinero ?
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd donate if you're talking about developing for the (older) A7. I still use mine and it would be nice to see a fresh rom for it.
I'd be in if I didn't just pick up the ZTE Optik from Sprint. Can't beat free and can't beat running JB via CM10. That 800 res is quite nice.
I'd greatly appreciate someone picking up work on the A7+. I still haven't flashed the newer firmware with the blank screen from sleep fix because I was holding out hope for a new custom rom. I'd have to root and install the outdated gapps again... And I'm sure we don't have unreasonably high expectations. I'd just like a rom without those awful elocity apps, doesn't black screen when I wake it, with google play, and with functioning hardware, anything more is welcome but uneccessary.
Ok his name is jam4 over at TR - check the thread for updates http://www.tabletroms.com/forums/elocity-a7-general-discussion/5362-any-other-devs-a7-a7.html
@dibmem jam4 is developing on the +, sorry
@frankwg83 yes he is working on honeycomb at the moment, but it sounds like your problems would be easily fixed... it takes 5 minutes and a flashdrive to install the Play Store and a root explorer and a 1-click-root app to get rid of the bloatware
6Leinad6 said:
Ok his name is jam4 over at TR - check the thread for updates http://www.tabletroms.com/forums/elocity-a7-general-discussion/5362-any-other-devs-a7-a7.html
@dibmem jam4 is developing on the +, sorry
@frankwg83 yes he is working on honeycomb at the moment, but it sounds like your problems would be easily fixed... it takes 5 minutes and a flashdrive to install the Play Store and a root explorer and a 1-click-root app to get rid of the bloatware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Think he would develop on the A7 if he had the hardware? I'm the type of person who'd buy one second hand just to donate it to a willing and capable dev.
dibmem said:
Think he would develop on the A7 if he had the hardware? I'm the type of person who'd buy one second hand just to donate it to a willing and capable dev.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe, I don't know. You'd have to ask him yourself - http://www.tabletroms.com/forums/members/jam4.html
"I am about 2 weeks out from releasing a working Honeycomb build for the A7+. Let me know how many of you are interested, either by pm or an email to [email protected]"
Everyone go PM or Email him!
So...2 weeks out? How'd that go?
Btw, the A7+ is at 1saleaday again for $70 this time. I'm willing to buy one and ship it to a developer if that's a hurdle since I'm pretty sure there are enough people out there that would want a solid Honeycomb or even Gingerbread firmware. I don't have the time/obsession to figure out the coding myself.
Forgive me if this is in the wrong place. Since I can only presume after WiMM was purchased it was used as a development platform for wear, wouldn't I be able to use aWear with the WiMM ? It's a large presumption, but I emailed the company and they have not responded. Would be a nice touch to be able to use this, even if the processor is a bit under par as the company just kinda slammed the doors on owners and left little in terms of functionality on the table. Anyone have any news on this? I managed to scrounge up the drivers and anything I could dig up on the old packages for the unit. Thanks in advance.
matthews1977 said:
Forgive me if this is in the wrong place. Since I can only presume after WiMM was purchased it was used as a development platform for wear, wouldn't I be able to use aWear with the WiMM ? It's a large presumption, but I emailed the company and they have not responded. Would be a nice touch to be able to use this, even if the processor is a bit under par as the company just kinda slammed the doors on owners and left little in terms of functionality on the table. Anyone have any news on this? I managed to scrounge up the drivers and anything I could dig up on the old packages for the unit. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An official port would surprise me greatly. It's possible that an unofficial version may made but the likelyhood of that depends on the fans of the device. Relatively few people have the WIMM One which means the chances of a strong developer or team of developers even having devices to build/debug on may be pretty low.
The other issue would be the specs. The CPU and RAM as well as the lack of Bluetooth LE and the lower resolution screen will likely be real challenges to overcome. The WIMM One currently runs a version of Android 2.1 so it wasn't built with kernel support for many of the features that Wear requires.
jefftheworld said:
An official port would surprise me greatly. It's possible that an unofficial version may made but the likelyhood of that depends on the fans of the device. Relatively few people have the WIMM One which means the chances of a strong developer or team of developers even having devices to build/debug on may be pretty low.
The other issue would be the specs. The CPU and RAM as well as the lack of Bluetooth LE and the lower resolution screen will likely be real challenges to overcome. The WIMM One currently runs a version of Android 2.1 so it wasn't built with kernel support for many of the features that Wear requires.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the reply and thorough explanation.
well as long as someone made a port im willing to put my wimm up for testing. im really pissed at wimm labs for leaving us for dead when they got bought out.
my wimm is essentially a brick right now because it cant sync or be setup on the wimm website
I agree
akromatic said:
well as long as someone made a port im willing to put my wimm up for testing. im really pissed at wimm labs for leaving us for dead when they got bought out.
my wimm is essentially a brick right now because it cant sync or be setup on the wimm website
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should have sent us all Moto 360s. Just crap because they sold the wimm one as a developer platform then
pulled the sdk and the store.
I want to source an Android smart watch from China for a project am working on. I want to change the menu interface it comes with and replace with a custom interface specific for my purpose (means no custom control to intended audience).
Thoughts Needed
Does anyone here have a similar experience?
Are they good at customizing ROMs and interfaces according to requirements?
If not, how easy is it to hire somebody to build a custom ROM with custom interface (for say MTK6572)?
Any recommended suppliers you know?
Phase 1 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements - 100 Units Order
Android OS
GSM/GPS
Touch screen
Mic/Speaker
Charging points on the back side (no micro-usb slot on the side)
Shortlisted AK-S5 or AK-S7
Phase 2 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements
All from Phase 1
IP67 or IP68
Magnetic based charger point on the backside
Heart rate sensor at the backside
Shortlisted - None available yet
abuduri said:
I want to source an Android smart watch from China for a project am working on. I want to change the menu interface it comes with and replace with a custom interface specific for my purpose (means no custom control to intended audience).
Thoughts Needed
Does anyone here have a similar experience?
Are they good at customizing ROMs and interfaces according to requirements?
If not, how easy is it to hire somebody to build a custom ROM with custom interface (for say MTK6572)?
Any recommended suppliers you know?
Phase 1 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements - 100 Units Order
Android OS
GSM/GPS
Touch screen
Mic/Speaker
Charging points on the back side (no micro-usb slot on the side)
Shortlisted AK-S5 or AK-S7
Phase 2 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements
All from Phase 1
IP67 or IP68
Magnetic based charger point on the backside
Heart rate sensor at the backside
Shortlisted - None available yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please note: to date no Chinese Android watches are IP67, even the ones that provide proof of IP certification, I've learned that the hard way
AK-55 is the Z01
The AK-S7 is or looks like ZGPAX S7
I'm sure you have experience dealing with Chinese sellers, but if you don't . .. . be extremely careful, even using Paypal, trust no one!
simple1i said:
Please note: to date no Chinese Android watches are IP67, even the ones that provide proof of IP certification, I've learned that the hard way
AK-55 is the Z01
The AK-S7 is or looks like ZGPAX S7
I'm sure you have experience dealing with Chinese sellers, but if you don't . .. . be extremely careful, even using Paypal, trust no one!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot @simple1i.
I have a chicken-egg question ... Which came first - AK-S5 or Z01? Which of these (or among numerous others on Alibaba) is "original" (designed first)? If there is no traceback and everyone is using the same reference design, as long as it works as intended, does it matter? I did get this supplier to show me the watch on skype video (though it doesn't prove anything).
My main question is - if the supplier really has a "fully working version" of S5 or Z01, and is ready to supply - they also say they will do ODM - any experience on their skills to make a custom ROM and change the menu interface to my needs? If not, anyone here willing to build the ROM and interface (paid)?
x201 model
abuduri said:
Thanks a lot @simple1i.
I have a chicken-egg question ... Which came first - AK-S5 or Z01? Which of these (or among numerous others on Alibaba) is "original" (designed first)? If there is no traceback and everyone is using the same reference design, as long as it works as intended, does it matter? I did get this supplier to show me the watch on skype video (though it doesn't prove anything).
My main question is - if the supplier really has a "fully working version" of S5 or Z01, and is ready to supply - they also say they will do ODM - any experience on their skills to make a custom ROM and change the menu interface to my needs? If not, anyone here willing to build the ROM and interface (paid)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I started looking into smartwatches on XDA from Mar 2014, so my history before then is limited. For me it started with the Omate TrueSmart, their Kickstarter campaign that promised it all and delivered a lie. I could be wrong, but Omate made the watch first (x201) and the rest copied (or someShenzhen firm made it first and Omate copied ) @pizzaman77 - knows the full history of Omate clones x201. But yes, now it does not matter as long as it works.
As for the development, you might get lucky and find that someone is already doing what you want or similar on the Omate forum - search on the Android development threads. I'm not a dev, so I don't if the Chineses sellers have the skills, doubt it. But the Devs on XDA will have. Look at this Omate thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/oma...rom-omate-truesmart-ironman-firmware-t2998434 - lots of dev going on on the Omate and its clones.
@kuronosan - is a key dev, still active, he might be able to help with paid work. You should start with making a new thread in the Omate Dev forum with your request.
@Lokifish Marz - knows a loooot but is not too actives these days
Please keep me informed on your dev plans (if its not top secret ) - i really really want to also buy a bulk order (maybe only 5 to start with) from China and sell them in the UK, but i need to join someone who is ordering in bulk so that i CAN only buy 5 units to start with. The other issue is i would need to fix any software issues first then sell them and if they sell then buy more. Can PM me if you wish. Thanks.
simple1i said:
I started looking into smartwatches on XDA from Mar 2014, so my history before then is limited. For me it started with the Omate TrueSmart, their Kickstarter campaign that promised it all and delivered a lie. I could be wrong, but Omate made the watch first (x201) and the rest copied (or someShenzhen firm made it first and Omate copied ) @pizzaman77 - knows the full history of Omate clones x201. But yes, now it does not matter as long as it works.
As for the development, you might get lucky and find that someone is already doing what you want or similar on the Omate forum - search on the Android development threads. I'm not a dev, so I don't if the Chineses sellers have the skills, doubt it. But the Devs on XDA will have. Look at this Omate thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/oma...rom-omate-truesmart-ironman-firmware-t2998434 - lots of dev going on on the Omate and its clones.
@kuronosan - is a key dev, still active, he might be able to help with paid work. You should start with making a new thread in the Omate Dev forum with your request.
@Lokifish Marz - knows a loooot but is not too actives these days
Please keep me informed on your dev plans (if its not top secret ) - i really really want to also buy a bulk order (maybe only 5 to start with) from China and sell them in the UK, but i need to join someone who is ordering in bulk so that i CAN only buy 5 units to start with. The other issue is i would need to fix any software issues first then sell them and if they sell then buy more. Can PM me if you wish. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a ton @simple1i. I will start a thread there.
Do you know any Android watches that fit my Phase 2 requirements (couldn't find any on Alibaba or similar sites)?
I did find a few watches fitting my spec without Android (either Nucleus or similar). Is it advisable to build on those platforms given that Android is now into wearables Reason I chose Android is because I want to be able to easily change supplier and/or watch hardware (looks) later easily and just port the code/functionality rather than getting locked. Else it will become an EXPENSIVE affair later. Am I right in thinking so?
abuduri said:
Thanks a ton @simple1i. I will start a thread there.
Do you know any Android watches that fit my Phase 2 requirements (couldn't find any on Alibaba or similar sites)?
I did find a few watches fitting my spec without Android (either Nucleus or similar). Is it advisable to build on those platforms given that Android is now into wearables Reason I chose Android is because I want to be able to easily change supplier and/or watch hardware (looks) later easily and just port the code/functionality rather than getting locked. Else it will become an EXPENSIVE affair later. Am I right in thinking so?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yes @simple1i, I will definitely keep you in the loop on the bulk ordering.
abuduri said:
Thanks a ton @simple1i. I will start a thread there.
Do you know any Android watches that fit my Phase 2 requirements (couldn't find any on Alibaba or similar sites)?
I did find a few watches fitting my spec without Android (either Nucleus or similar). Is it advisable to build on those platforms given that Android is now into wearables Reason I chose Android is because I want to be able to easily change supplier and/or watch hardware (looks) later easily and just port the code/functionality rather than getting locked. Else it will become an EXPENSIVE affair later. Am I right in thinking so?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I'd stick with Android, lots of resources available, gives more flexibility. I don't think Nucleus OS is a viable option yet, it would be too expensive.
I take it SIM is a requirement too? I'll look around, the IP67 is not available yet, maybe the Ironman 3rd generation might be IP67, but the company (Unova) is full of liars, I was ripped off with the 2nd generation, I proved it's not IP67. Other then the IP67 the rest might be available, you'll need to search for it on AliExpress.
What country are you from?
simple1i said:
Yes I'd stick with Android, lots of resources available, gives more flexibility. I don't think Nucleus OS is a viable option yet, it would be too expensive.
I take it SIM is a requirement too? I'll look around, the IP67 is not available yet, maybe the Ironman 3rd generation might be IP67, but the company (Unova) is full of liars, I was ripped off with the 2nd generation, I proved it's not IP67. Other then the IP67 the rest might be available, you'll need to search for it on AliExpress.
What country are you from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, with 2G. 3G really not needed but if it comes with it, cool. Couldn't find any with android and heart rate on back side, keeping IP67 on the side.
Am currently in Boston (originally from India).
simple1i said:
Yes I'd stick with Android, lots of resources available, gives more flexibility. I don't think Nucleus OS is a viable option yet, it would be too expensive.
I take it SIM is a requirement too? I'll look around, the IP67 is not available yet, maybe the Ironman 3rd generation might be IP67, but the company (Unova) is full of liars, I was ripped off with the 2nd generation, I proved it's not IP67. Other then the IP67 the rest might be available, you'll need to search for it on AliExpress.
What country are you from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@simple1i ... is Android Wear OS same as Android 4.4 etc running on Z01 (and others) etc?
abuduri said:
@simple1i ... is Android Wear OS same as Android 4.4 etc running on Z01 (and others) etc?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Found the answer ... http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/what-operating-systems-do-wearable-devices-run-on/
Looks like Android Wear needs a compatible Android phone for it to work.
So, I'll stick with just Android.
General rules with Chinese Android smartwatches
Broken firmware
Major security holes
Little to no official support (this includes the phone side app)
English (or any other language other than Chinese) for the phone app is very rare
Incomplete source code (when you can even get it) that is a generic build pulled from a phone
Inconsistent battery life due to broken firmware
IP67 is more like IP54 if lucky
Poor build quality and QC by western standards
Not Lokifish supported (I've walked away from the industry as a whole until they get their collective heads out of their butts)
kuronosan's time is limited so fixes may be slow
Depending on your needs and goals. Talk to Ingenic. The HW is a little slow on the Newton (SmartQ Z uses it), not sure about the Newton 2. Either way they have source (Linux, Android, etc). The package is small enough that you could design and build a smartwatch that's about the same size as a real watch, but the display will need a new "crystal" to pull it off nicely. Find a compatible round display, and you should be able to use off the shelf watch cases with minor modifications giving you a 200m diver's smartwatch if you do it right.
*Side note
Even with a 1/2 million buy in for 3000 units we designed ourselves, Umeox still would not have provided source code, and little to no support. That's what the Chinese ODM's are like. kuronosan can verify this.
@abuduri - I'm not sure if my reply to your PM went thru? I can't see it in my sent folder. Did you get it?
I'm still working on stuff for the Omate. I just haven't actually had any free time as of late. I can't just take off of work to put work into a device that's difficult to troubleshoot. If I can be of any help let me know.
I've just started working with smartwatches, but I'm happy to help however I can. I'll be attempting some work on the s8, and I know my way around Android pretty well.
kuronosan said:
I'm still working on stuff for the Omate. I just haven't actually had any free time as of late. I can't just take off of work to put work into a device that's difficult to troubleshoot. If I can be of any help let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@kuronosan @chainsol - thanks guys.
The thread for the new smartwatch is here, we have 5 people so far: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=3115221 - including an electronic engineering. [emoji818]
firmware files of z01
abuduri said:
I want to source an Android smart watch from China for a project am working on. I want to change the menu interface it comes with and replace with a custom interface specific for my purpose (means no custom control to intended audience).
Thoughts Needed
Does anyone here have a similar experience?
Are they good at customizing ROMs and interfaces according to requirements?
If not, how easy is it to hire somebody to build a custom ROM with custom interface (for say MTK6572)?
Any recommended suppliers you know?
Phase 1 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements - 100 Units Order
Android OS
GSM/GPS
Touch screen
Mic/Speaker
Charging points on the back side (no micro-usb slot on the side)
Shortlisted AK-S5 or AK-S7
Phase 2 MUST HAVE Minimum Requirements
All from Phase 1
IP67 or IP68
Magnetic based charger point on the backside
Heart rate sensor at the backside
Shortlisted - None available yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
need firmware files for z01 (android 5.1)
Heads up to those interested.. I think the kickstarter campaign is going to start soon. Looks like it could be pretty decent if the hype is anything to go by.
Hopefully they'll involve communities like this one in their development, it'd certainly help brand awareness!
Edit : In fact they have a pre-launch fb group here - https://m.facebook.com/groups/577584915748399
Edit 2 : Any devs interested in the watch should join, they genuinely seem interested in community participation, so any feedback from you guys would be good.
Early bird offer will apparently be less than $100
ElGrecko said:
Early bird offer will apparently be less than $100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got the same email, apparently releasing on kickstarter in 2 weeks..
To all who is interested in this watch... they will launch a Kickstarter Campaign.
The more people join this group the more discount they will offer in the campaing!!
https://www.facebook.com/groups/577584915748399/?pnref=story
all info is there!
Ticwear have just updated there website..
Date listed July 19th Available on Kickstarter
http://ticwear.com/en/online_shop.php
Cheers.
Just to keep people updated, ticwatch have a special Kickstarter developer incentive
Voila.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mobvoi/ticwatch-2-the-most-interactive-smartwatch/
Got mine , can't wait.
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
Got the Onyx... also cant wait.
Very nice! I was hoping to get a free one for nominating the onyx name, but my hints are falling on deaf ears!
Got an Oak too
Enviado desde mi PRO 6 mediante Tapatalk
Congrats guys, hope it's a step above the rest. It is refreshing to see companies interact with the paying public like that, I know pebble did really well with their campaign, but I'm not sure how open they were to suggestion from the community.
Unfortunately (fortunately) I procured a fenix 3 for my birthday recently and it suits me down to the ground, otherwise I'd have definitely grabbed one of these.
Looking forward to the Onyx to add to my collection: seems to offer a lot of possibilities and upgrades for the smart watch communities...wondering if I'm developing a watch addiction...12 steps here I come................
Does any one know much about the cpu mt2601 I think. It just seems a bit of a backward step to me ?
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
Yo can watch some videos and see how smooth it is....
http://www.soku.com/search_video/q_...0000_ticwatch_ticwatch 2&_rp=1469779163203HKv
snake65 said:
Does any one know much about the cpu mt2601 I think. It just seems a bit of a backward step to me ?
Sent from my JAZZ using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.mediatek.com/en/products/internet-of-things/wearables/mt2601/
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mobvoi/ticwatch-2-the-most-interactive-smartwatch/posts/1662993
$2,085,491 Pledged.?*
9,955 Backers.?*
#1 all time in Kickstarter projects originating from China. [Out of 457]?*
#1 all time in Kickstarter Wearable projects. [Out of 796]
#15 all time in Kickstarter Technology projects. [Out of 24,250]?*
#61 all time in All Kickstarter projects. [Out of 311,871]
They've done well. Let's see what happens next.
I pledged for an Onyx and can't wait to get it.... Hopefully they release the code and the XDA Community can make magic happen =)
I've received mine - it's easy enough to get Android APKs and Wear APKs on to it, but it lacks a browser and account manager so many apps will crash out. However, many also work perfectly fine, particularly once you modify the DPI.
It's a lovely watch - the best I've owned, although the Gear S running Android is also very functional in a different (ie fully Android) way.
Rooting is problematic for now - most of the usual apps aren't successful at rooting. Has anyone found a successful process?
No problems with the CPU and it charges quickly wirelessly. All in, a lovely watch.
Question - other than the custom OS features, is it worth more than the £99 Gearbest watches? I'm not sure, but it's certainly stylish.
I'd buy it at £130, but I think that's the price point all good smartwatches should be at.
V
vijay555 said:
I've received mine - it's easy enough to get Android APKs and Wear APKs on to it, but it lacks a browser and account manager so many apps will crash out. However, many also work perfectly fine, particularly once you modify the DPI.
It's a lovely watch - the best I've owned, although the Gear S running Android is also very functional in a different (ie fully Android) way.
Rooting is problematic for now - most of the usual apps aren't successful at rooting. Has anyone found a successful process?
No problems with the CPU and it charges quickly wirelessly. All in, a lovely watch.
Question - other than the custom OS features, is it worth more than the £99 Gearbest watches? I'm not sure, but it's certainly stylish.
I'd buy it at £130, but I think that's the price point all good smartwatches should be at.
V
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Being an MTK2601 based smartwatch, are you able to dump the ROM files with MTK droid Tools and SP Flash tool?