I've read that the snapdragon 400 chip natively support GPS.
Is it possible to active it in a custom rom ?
doud1357 said:
I've read that the snapdragon 400 chip natively support GPS.
Is it possible to active it in a custom rom ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, while the processor chip may have support for GPS, the watch does not have the required sensors needed to get a GPS lock and to feed data to the processor.
If the sensor was actually in the device? Certainly there would be a way to enable it with a custom ROM, but that still dictates that the sensor would need to be built into it.
doud1357 said:
I've read that the snapdragon 400 chip natively support GPS.
Is it possible to active it in a custom rom ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It means it natively has support for a GPS, it doesn't mean it has one embedded within the Snapdragon 400 SoC.
How about a portable gps reciever it's small and you can take with you. I have a nexus 6 and a LG G not GPS when I go for a run I have to take my phone to track my run could there be a way to bluetooth a GPS reciever to work with G watch. Like the way some people use there tablets and GPS same Idea?
What about Wi-Fi?
Many sites I follow are currently suggesting that the smartwatches powered by the Snapdragon 400 might have built in Wi-Fi antennas. The LG G Watch has a Snapdragon 400 APQ8026 but this SoC doesn't seem to have it. Can anyone confirm this?
matteo.gee said:
Many sites I follow are currently suggesting that the smartwatches powered by the Snapdragon 400 might have built in Wi-Fi antennas. The LG G Watch has a Snapdragon 400 APQ8026 but this SoC doesn't seem to have it. Can anyone confirm this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I looked at the teardown, the radio chipset is solely BT 4.0 :\ no wifi hardware in sight. However while the SoC supports it, without the hardware, that support is useless. Sorry to say
I read the watches have wifi but no antennas. Is it that they actually have the needed hardware but lack the circuitry for an antenna? Maybe a hardmod? Or no?
player911 said:
I read the watches have wifi but no antennas. Is it that they actually have the needed hardware but lack the circuitry for an antenna? Maybe a hardmod? Or no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. What you are reading is that they have the hardware to SUPPORT a wifi module (Some do actually only lack the antenna, however those will also lack drivers since the OEMs are not likely to make them). Not that there is one built into the SoC. As with the GPS above, even though your SoC supports something, doesn't mean it already has the hardware needed built into it.
@LittleLX: I actually attempted this and attempted to sideload a Bluetooth GPS receiver app to the watch, unfortunately because almost all of them use the Android ActionBar, it refused to start up. Android Wear is restricting applications to the swipe to dismiss action and forbidding the actionbar on versions of Android with Swipe to Dismiss on. That said, there is definitely room for this type of application to be developed for Android Wear, I had sideloaded CF.Lumen and ES File Manager, and while CF.Lumen doesn't open because of it's ActionBar, I had put together a tasker app factory app to attempt to play around and trigger (I had manually installed the CF.Lumen driver) it, it did show that it would work if I had been able to set up location services inside the app (choose the location for the automatic dimming..)
So Android Wear has potential to be a very powerful and extensible platform, developers just aren't interested in it yet it seems. We as a people seem to be stuck looking at a smartwatch as a watch rather than a wrist computer.
Related
The BCM4330 has a number of listed features that our SGS2s do not appear to have. For instance, the chip in question has listed support for Bluetooth 4.0+HS (so, I assume the Bluetooth low power standard) and FM Transmission/Receive, however all sources state that the SGS2 only supports up to Bluetooth 3.0, does not have Bluetooth high speed (virtually the same as Wifi direct, I'm told, but may not have the same level of uptake) and there are no references to FM transmission.
Without relevant APIs or sources I assume none of these unused features can be utilised. Is it a possibility that Samsung removed some components of the chip to reduce bulk?
What's confused me about this entire situation is that the original Galaxy S and the iPhone4 feature this same chipset, but there's not even a mention of Bluetooth3.0 even though they appear to support it . . . weird. Perhaps I've completely failed to understand the nature of these chipsets, but if I'm not being completely stupid then it'd be nice to explore how one could fiddle with our precious phones to extend its capabilities.
Bump
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
HazzBazz said:
The BCM4330 has a number of listed features that our SGS2s do not appear to have. For instance, the chip in question has listed support for Bluetooth 4.0+HS (so, I assume the Bluetooth low power standard) and FM Transmission/Receive, however all sources state that the SGS2 only supports up to Bluetooth 3.0, does not have Bluetooth high speed (virtually the same as Wifi direct, I'm told, but may not have the same level of uptake) and there are no references to FM transmission.
Without relevant APIs or sources I assume none of these unused features can be utilised. Is it a possibility that Samsung removed some components of the chip to reduce bulk?
What's confused me about this entire situation is that the original Galaxy S and the iPhone4 feature this same chipset, but there's not even a mention of Bluetooth3.0 even though they appear to support it . . . weird. Perhaps I've completely failed to understand the nature of these chipsets, but if I'm not being completely stupid then it'd be nice to explore how one could fiddle with our precious phones to extend its capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Example:
Back then, at MWC 10, Samsung introduced the Samsung Omnia HD (i8910) which has alot of things AND an FM transmitter, when the device was actually launch, it didn't have the FM transmitter, modders and coders saw & knew that this device have the component, even proved with a secret code and an app they build, but no one has ever managed to get it to work.
So far of being a costumer at Samsung corp. I noticed 2 mistakes that they are repeating:
1. Samsung can't manage to get solid 30fps at 720p devices and 1080p.
2. Samsung rls products with an FM transmitter but they never support it and doing everything that we won't manage to get it work.
The fact that this chip is capable of performing all those tasks does not mean it is capable of doing all those task simultaneously. There might be some hardware challenges/contradictions between the different roles.
For instance, bluetooth 4.0 requires filtering above 3GHz of more than 10dB, while at the same time the chip is capable of Wifi on 5GHz; both are supposed to be on the same antenna so either you can not use the chip for Bluetooth 4.0 AND wifi 5GHz or you have to use some very complicated filter depending on which mode you're using. If they have not supplied this filter inside the chip then it becomes a bit complicated to use both modes.
The FM transceiver could very well be connected to the same internal power amplifiers as wifi but a wifi antenna does not look like an FM antenna.
It is not always possible (actually seldom) to use all the specifications of a chip at the same time with the same hardware setup. (Though often the user won't notice because it is not able to check the specification, like ultra low power and high speed often conflict.)
The features you mention are integrated into the chip itself, so it's not possible to "offload" them. However, they may leave out necessary off-chip components and/or enabling software.
For example, FM is popular in Korea. Many Samsung models targeted to the Korean Market include FM capability. It requires extra hardware though, including a rather primitive looking FM antenna. The corresponding models for other parts of the world leave this out. I presume Samsung doesn't see the popularity of FM in other parts of the world to be enough to make up for the extra cost in the handset.
Drivers and such require work, too. So while the chip may support the capability, they may postpone the software development for various reasons. If the hardware support is fully intact, it might be possible to make something work, but it could require some very deep hacking.
requist's response is interesting and seems like a possibility, although a quick reading of the Broadcom product page seems to suggest they've accounted for mixing capabilities in the chip design. Hard to tell without more detailed info.
Disclaimer: I'm not an official spokesperson. Opinions expressed here are mine and not those of my employer.
requist said:
The fact that this chip is capable of performing all those tasks does not mean it is capable of doing all those task simultaneously. There might be some hardware challenges/contradictions between the different roles.
For instance, bluetooth 4.0 requires filtering above 3GHz of more than 10dB, while at the same time the chip is capable of Wifi on 5GHz; both are supposed to be on the same antenna so either you can not use the chip for Bluetooth 4.0 AND wifi 5GHz or you have to use some very complicated filter depending on which mode you're using. If they have not supplied this filter inside the chip then it becomes a bit complicated to use both modes.
The FM transceiver could very well be connected to the same internal power amplifiers as wifi but a wifi antenna does not look like an FM antenna.
It is not always possible (actually seldom) to use all the specifications of a chip at the same time with the same hardware setup. (Though often the user won't notice because it is not able to check the specification, like ultra low power and high speed often conflict.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
time division multiplexing.
Dirty_Jerz said:
time division multiplexing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That does not solve hardware conflicts.
Hi chaps,
I'm just wondering which GPS chipset the device uses, and therefore what the spec sheet numbers are for cold start, etc.
jimcpl kindly posted the device's dmesg output in this thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=20531460
but there's no sign of the GPS. Would someone mind posting the dmesg output (or just the tail end) with the GPS up and running so I can see if there's anything in there?
On the Tab 7 the GPS is integrated with the modem, but presumably the Player lacks a modem so it will have the GPS connected somewhere else perhaps more easily accessible from Linux (though one never knows - it might be cheaper to use an existing package even if it's not fully activated)
Thanks
Hi,
I just checked and did another dmesg with the GPS enabled, and also running Navfree, but I don't see anything in the dmesg re. GPS. Do you know what to look for?
Jim
No not really.
I suppose the GPS chip may be directly connected to one of the GPIOs and the firmware and setup is all handled by a userspace library talking to it through a sysfs/dev entry (which are automatically setup by the kernel, without necessarily any indication of what's attached).
Looking at the sysfs might give some clues, but really don't worry too much, I'll do some digging once mine turns up.
Ah, I see that the GPS comms are handled by a library called libgps*.so (can have different suffixes depending on the hw manufacturer), so doing some reverse engineering of this file is probably the next step in order to work out where the chip is attached and what it is.
Interestingly the GPS comms pass through libril as is the case on devices with a modem.
Also vaguely interesting is the fact that "Cell Standby" has used 67% of my battery use (which is ~20% of the battery) overnight. Does anyone know where the UI gets this info from? If it's just summing the CPU time used by some process attached to libril*.so (which would normally handle modem comms, as well as the GPS) that would be fair enough, otherwise it's a conundrum (I guess we don'[t really have a modem in the device which we just can't access....)?
Re chipset, I didn't spot anything in the strings of the various libraries, but I only had a quick look. It is, however, a Broadcom chipset as I can see the function entry points to the static library that Broadcom supply built into libgps*.so.
I must see whether Broadcom supply source (very unlikely) or binaries to the general public and not just large companies....
lardman said:
Interestingly the GPS comms pass through libril as is the case on devices with a modem.
Also vaguely interesting is the fact that "Cell Standby" has used 67% of my battery use (which is ~20% of the battery) overnight. Does anyone know where the UI gets this info from? If it's just summing the CPU time used by some process attached to libril*.so (which would normally handle modem comms, as well as the GPS) that would be fair enough, otherwise it's a conundrum (I guess we don'[t really have a modem in the device which we just can't access....)?
Re chipset, I didn't spot anything in the strings of the various libraries, but I only had a quick look. It is, however, a Broadcom chipset as I can see the function entry points to the static library that Broadcom supply built into libgps*.so.
I must see whether Broadcom supply source (very unlikely) or binaries to the general public and not just large companies....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Broacom is one of the least open-source friendly companies on the planet.
I was considering the Galaxy Player, but if the GPS is from Broadcom I'm not touching it with a ten foot pole.
Assuming it uses the same version of the GPS as the Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab (no way I can see to recognise it from the strings in the binary, but if anyone has any ideas I'm all ears), then this is also the same chipset as the Nokia N950 uses, and the N950 runs Maemo/Meego which makes things nicer.
Namely there's a kernel driver for the chipset, but this is just a gateway and one requires the firmware and userspace binary to talk to the GPS chip. On the N950 this is in a binary-only daemon.
So not ideal, but at least a kernel driver possibly exists (I've not checked whether it works on the Tab or Player), so it's a step in the right direction; just some reverse engineering to do now (or for my usecase, which is porting Meego to the device, just see if the binary will run)
lardman said:
Assuming it uses the same version of the GPS as the Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab (no way I can see to recognise it from the strings in the binary, but if anyone has any ideas I'm all ears), then this is also the same chipset as the Nokia N950 uses, and the N950 runs Maemo/Meego which makes things nicer.
Namely there's a kernel driver for the chipset, but this is just a gateway and one requires the firmware and userspace binary to talk to the GPS chip. On the N950 this is in a binary-only daemon.
So not ideal, but at least a kernel driver possibly exists (I've not checked whether it works on the Tab or Player), so it's a step in the right direction; just some reverse engineering to do now (or for my usecase, which is porting Meego to the device, just see if the binary will run)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's pretty rare for there to be a kernel driver for anything but reset/power management GPIOs - most of these devices use a serial interface that the GPS libs or userspace daemon talk to.
I can't find any YP-G70 teardowns for more details... Got kinda tempted at BBY today... If it's Broadcom I'm staying away, if it's something else I might go for it.
Entropy512 said:
It's pretty rare for there to be a kernel driver for anything but reset/power management GPIOs - most of these devices use a serial interface that the GPS libs or userspace daemon talk to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, certainly there's still work to do, but knowing how to power the device up is a nice freebie, rather than needing to reverse engineer that too.
Entropy512 said:
I can't find any YP-G70 teardowns for more details... Got kinda tempted at BBY today... If it's Broadcom I'm staying away, if it's something else I might go for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's definitely Broadcom I'm afraid, the libgps.so strings contains a load of functions that appear to come from Broadcom (I can't list any right now, it's on a different computer, but can do so this evening if you're interested)
For all the developers on this board, what if you had...
a higher powered Mini
AOSP, let's say Marshmallow or better
all the dev tools you'd need to get to work
...what would you, could you dream to develop this computer to do?
TV box? Gaming console? Android PC? Smart home device?
Please share with us your brainstorm ideas on this. Have fun with it and don't think about what's already out on the market... think out of the box, reach for the stars, and all the other cliches you can think of. Please share in the comments below.
Thanks!
A combination of all the above!
Smart nuclear powered anti-starship laser guns.
Just kidding, possibly a wireless router or a media server.
well I like something like win 7 ultimate. with a htpc media center,good gaming and nice professional os with good look.
not the current flat look but something more 3d like seven was.
but I am sure you prefer a idea for your Android stuff...
so what about jide making intel cherry trail devices? those could be nice for TV box or computer? or good snapdragon with long term support?
tailslol said:
well I like something like win 7 ultimate. with a htpc media center,good gaming and nice professional os with good look.
not the current flat look but something more 3d like seven was.
but I am sure you prefer a idea for your Android stuff...
so what about jide making intel cherry trail devices? those could be nice for TV box or computer? or good snapdragon with long term support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or MediaTek, but force them to give you updated kernel sources and release them to the public.
Just saying because MTK chips last longer, and perform better (except for GPU performance) than counterpart Snapdragon chips.
moriel5 said:
Or MediaTek, but force them to give you updated kernel sources and release them to the public.
Just saying because MTK chips last longer, and perform better (except for GPU performance) than counterpart Snapdragon chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not mediatek they hide their resources sometime. and absolutely not Allwinner their chip are ****s... Rockchip or amilogic S is OK in the worse case scenario...
NVIDIA tegra are pricey but good for all in ones.especialy with Google support behind.
Or you can cheat on the support by using same Chips as Android one phones, nexus. or pixel..so no source hiding.
tailslol said:
not mediatek they hide their resources sometime. and absolutely not Allwinner their chip are ****s... Rockchip or amilogic S is OK in the worse case scenario...
NVIDIA tegra are pricey but good for all in ones.especialy with Google support behind.
Or you can cheat on the support by using same Chips as Android one phones, nexus. or pixel..so no source hiding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you not see what I had witten about forcing MediaTek to release their kernel sources?
Rockchip also hides many of their kernel sources, and are a pain to work with, (I had to use an ancient computer from over a decade ago, and had to install Windows XP, since it wouldn't work with anything newer).
Allwinner are a solid choice, since they are much more open with their sources, and are much easier to work with, it's just that not many developers work with them, but those that do, testify to them being much easier to work with.
About Amlogic, I have no idea.
Nvidia, are really good, but are even worse than MediaTek and Rockchip at releasing kernel sources, so unless it's the same chipset as the Nexus 9, it needs to be out of the question.
But please no BIG.little processors, they are great on paper, however in the real world, while they deliver, they don't deliver even close to what they should, ending up being a waste of money, since the worth:cost ratio is much farther.
moriel5 said:
Did you not see what I had witten about forcing MediaTek to release their kernel sources?
Rockchip also hides many of their kernel sources, and are a pain to work with, (I had to use an ancient computer from over a decade ago, and had to install Windows XP, since it wouldn't work with anything newer).
Allwinner are a solid choice, since they are much more open with their sources, and are much easier to work with, it's just that not many developers work with them, but those that do, testify to them being much easier to work with.
About Amlogic, I have no idea.
Nvidia, are really good, but are even worse than MediaTek and Rockchip at releasing kernel sources, so unless it's the same chipset as the Nexus 9, it needs to be out of the question.
But please no BIG.little processors, they are great on paper, however in the real world, while they deliver, they don't deliver even close to what they should, ending up being a waste of money, since the worth:cost ratio is much farther.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the thing about big little... nowadays with the failure of TV boxes and the slow death of tablets most big company are targeting the phone market.
and big little is mostly for phones ...
but I think the only problem is not targeting the lower end or not using too old than 2 years chips and sometime it is just better to spend a lil more for higher support and better performances.
on Nvidia side almost all chips have been open sourced by Google long time ago.
the tegra x1 in pixel c the tegra 2 3 4 and k1 in nexus tablets... so yea....
tailslol said:
the thing about big little... nowadays with the failure of TV boxes and the slow death of tablets most big company are targeting the phone market.
and big little is mostly for phones ...
but I think the only problem is not targeting the lower end or not using too old than 2 years chips and sometime it is just better to spend a lil more for higher support and better performances.
on Nvidia side almost all chips have been open sourced by Google long time ago.
the tegra x1 in pixel c the tegra 2 3 4 and k1 in nexus tablets... so yea....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah sorry, I had checked it.
And it looks like they have their own code repository now, so things have definitely changed.
RemixOS_Jason said:
For all the developers on this board, what if you had...
a higher powered Mini
AOSP, let's say Marshmallow or better
all the dev tools you'd need to get to work
...what would you, could you dream to develop this computer to do?
TV box? Gaming console? Android PC? Smart home device?
Please share with us your brainstorm ideas on this. Have fun with it and don't think about what's already out on the market... think out of the box, reach for the stars, and all the other cliches you can think of. Please share in the comments below.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would build my own version of Android!
Dual boot as much as possible!
Publish my Project ROC quicker
What about using the mini along with wireless display, and use them as a home security/automation hub? Allowing many apps and already existing "connected" devices like Philips HUE, WiFi Cameras, etc to connect and be configured for automation. Then assigning older android devices to pair and be set in various rooms, to be used as wifi motion detectors.
Well as a developer, I'd improve the way I interact with my devices as an user.
Chromecast and Android Home devices are great but they're not how the future should actually look. In my opinion Google is limiting hardware on those devices to keep prices low and make them impossible to run upcoming software, more powerful software.
Okay let's say we have an AIO device (similar to Android Home) but with a few sets of functionality baked in:
- Network attached Storage: Store all the things you want to share with the family (photos, music, movies...)
- Network attached Storage: Stream whatever is hosted in the box to the "cast enabled devices around the device"
- Network attached Storage: Synced folders between family devices per user request (similar to how resilio sync works)
- Network attached Storage: Remote access for downloads (you're out of home but you start a download that will be waiting for you when you arrive)
- Assistant: Always On Keyword detection
- Assistant: Customized context-aware commands per user inside the network (If John or his devices are not connected to the Wireless network or discoverable through BLE don't suggest content that he might like)
- Assistant: TV as a remote interface of the device with a dashboard, the device microphone as a IO device of the TV.
- Assistant: Device state awareness, notify when battery is low on x device.
BRAINSTORM -- What if Jide actually focused on getting the projects they currently have out working to perfection instead of coming out with new semi broken products?! Then, when everything worked as best as possible, Jide could come out with new stuff that makes the current goodness even better!!!! Wow, what a novel concept!
If i had it, (and if i can), I'll bring the android code and libs to windows,, it's just like WINE on Ubuntu, and isn't like the ancient emulator which is kill my usage
So,, yes... I'll open the play store just when i click it in my windows PC's, installing apk just in Program Files (Android) folder, using linux or android command in cmd (like bash actually) and getting a root access with just allow the UAC
Some of you might already be aware others maybe not, with the latest build of the "Headunit Reloaded app" you can now enjoy the Android Auto experience on almost any device. The app can be found in it's own thread, together with all the how to's and all the support: https://forum.xda-developers.com/ge...ndroid-4-1-headunit-reloaded-android-t3432348
Currently confirmed units capable to run the app:
- RK3188 based units, but only through Wifi connection
- AN-21U, xTrons, will work with USB, but only using Software decoding (occasionally that can produce some H264 decoding glitched)
-Allwinner powered devices
- Intel powered Joying units
Possibly other devices as well.
I have just updated the free trial app version to match the latest release so trial now also include all the features from the main build for those who want to try it out on their devices.
Can you tell me what this actually can do for me?
Oldpapa49 said:
Can you tell me what this actually can do for me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The app allows you to convert your Android powered headunit into an "Android Auto" compatible headunit, instead of buying an expensive Sony/Pioneer/Kenwood which can run Android Auto on it, you can use you existing unit to do so.
Emil Borconi said:
The app allows you to convert your Android powered headunit into an "Android Auto" compatible headunit, instead of buying an expensive Sony/Pioneer/Kenwood which can run Android Auto on it, you can use you existing unit to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great, I give it a try after my business trip.
Emil Borconi said:
The app allows you to convert your Android powered headunit into an "Android Auto" compatible headunit, instead of buying an expensive Sony/Pioneer/Kenwood which can run Android Auto on it, you can use you existing unit to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont understand the point - a full Android headunit can do so much more than Android auto.
Its a bit like saying "theres this great app that reduces the functionality of your device and makes it dumber".
Or have I missed something ?
typos1 said:
I dont understand the point - a full Android headunit can do so much more than Android auto.
Its a bit like saying "theres this great app that reduces the functionality of your device and makes it dumber".
Or have I missed something ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi.
You are half way right, using "Android Auto" is way more limited than using a full blown Android, but it has some advantages as well, like for example it integrates SMS control from the headunit and data used between the phone and the headunit isn't classed as tethered data, which comes VERY hand for those who have included allowance in their phone package but not usable for tethering. Meaning you can listen to online streams (radios) on the road without tethering to the headunit. I know you can do that over A2DP as well, but most of this devices have a very cheap and bad quality A2DP receiver making listening to anything a painful act rather than an enjoyable experience.
Others will find the simplicity of the app appealing as well as the fact that it removes all the unnecessary notifications (distractions) while driving, but this like everything else related to Android Auto VS a full Android headunit is subjective.
Everybody has different needs, different preferences and so on so while some people will find Android Auto to be the best alternative possible others will say it's stupid to limit the functionality of your headunit. I tend to agree with both of them and both have valid points, I thinks it's down to individual preference.
Emil Borconi said:
Hi.
You are half way right, using "Android Auto" is way more limited than using a full blown Android, but it has some advantages as well, like for example it integrates SMS control from the headunit and data used between the phone and the headunit isn't classed as tethered data, which comes VERY hand for those who have included allowance in their phone package but not usable for tethering. Meaning you can listen to online streams (radios) on the road without tethering to the headunit. I know you can do that over A2DP as well, but most of this devices have a very cheap and bad quality A2DP receiver making listening to anything a painful act rather than an enjoyable experience.
Others will find the simplicity of the app appealing as well as the fact that it removes all the unnecessary notifications (distractions) while driving, but this like everything else related to Android Auto VS a full Android headunit is subjective.
Everybody has different needs, different preferences and so on so while some people will find Android Auto to be the best alternative possible others will say it's stupid to limit the functionality of your headunit. I tend to agree with both of them and both have valid points, I thinks it's down to individual preference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you make some good points actually, some of which I find quite appealing. I kinda fancy some of those features on my Android headunit without running Android auto.
Just seen youre the dev, I wasnt trying to dis your project, just couldnt see the point, although I can now and yeah, its all subjective and down to personal preference.
typos1 said:
Yes, you make some good points actually, some of which I find quite appealing. I kinda fancy some of those features on my Android headunit without running Android auto.
Just seen youre the dev, I wasnt trying to dis your project, just couldnt see the point, although I can now and yeah, its all subjective and down to personal preference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries haven't considered it like that, I like to be as objective as possible, same with AutoMate, I think it's a great app and usually when I'm asked to compared it against AA I try to do it in objective way.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter which approach somebody takes until the it doesn't start with the i letter
Emil Borconi said:
No worries haven't considered it like that, I like to be as objective as possible, same with AutoMate, I think it's a great app and usually when I'm asked to compared it against AA I try to do it in objective way.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter which approach somebody takes until the it doesn't start with the i letter
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe your next project should be bringing some of the advantages of this one to people who dont want Android Auto on their Android headunit, but want some of the benefits youve pointed out, like tethering data classed as phone data and SMS control from the headunit ? Sort of a halfway house. (I m joking but kinda serious too).
Emil Borconi said:
Some of you might already be aware others maybe not, with the latest build of the "Headunit Reloaded app" you can now enjoy the Android Auto experience on almost any device. The app can be found in it's own thread, together with all the how to's and all the support: https://forum.xda-developers.com/ge...ndroid-4-1-headunit-reloaded-android-t3432348
Currently confirmed units capable to run the app:
- RK3188 based units, but only through Wifi connection
- AN-21U, xTrons, will work with USB, but only using Software decoding (occasionally that can produce some H264 decoding glitched)
-Allwinner powered devices
- Intel powered Joying units
Possibly other devices as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Emil,
I've sent yiu an email as well.
I'm in India and I just bought an android head unit. Its Allwin. When I go on the app store, I can't download the app, its not compatible.
Please tell me what to do?
@Emil Borconi , confirmed working on mtcd ha 1.63c with Hal9k_ Nougat ROM on RK3188 1GB unit over wifi! Purchasing, best of luck.
hey, it's working fine, but is it possible to change resolution to 1024x768? I can work only on 800x640, and the next one is 1280x720, which isn't working properly on my HU
(RNE -L23)
NFC on the Huawei Mate 10 Lite ....Is this a hardware or software consideration? From what I've figured out, its not officially supported. Is there a software update that can make this possible or its a hardware shortcoming?
borderfox said:
(RNE -L23)
NFC on the Huawei Mate 10 Lite ....Is this a hardware or software consideration? From what I've figured out, its not officially supported. Is there a software update that can make this possible or its a hardware shortcoming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, you won’t be able to use NFC on your device, if it not NFC enabled.
NFC: Near Field Communication.
How it works: It's a method of wireless data transfer that detects and then enables technology in close proximity to communicate without the need for an internet connection. It's easy, fast and works automatically.
The tech involved is deceptively simple.Evolved from radio frequency identification (RFID) tech, an NFC chip operates as one part of a wireless link. Once it's activated by another chip, small amounts of data between the two devices can be transferred when held a few centimeters from each other.
Hence, you need NFC chip on both the devices to enable data transfer or anything else.
Thanks for confirming.