yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Nook Color General] TabletConnect:
TabletConnect's Official Review - ViewSonic ViewBook 730

Conclusion

Overall, the ViewBook performed OK and is meant to compete in the low-end tablet market with a price of $230. The ViewBook has some good features: 1) great screen compared to other resistive screens; 2) front facing camera; 3) mini-HDMI port; 4) Bluetooth; 5) played video formats including HD without any problems; and 6) handwriting recognition works fine. However, there are some negatives: 1) poor body construction; 2) poor screen (resolution & not capacitive); 3) slightly weaker processor; 4) no 1+1 nor multi-touch screen; and 5) significant difference in battery life between having the WiFi on and having it off. Unless you need a front facing camera and a HDMI port, we would rather buy a Nook Color and install CM7 (see our review of the Nook Color running Phiremod 6.3). If ViewBook 730's price was under $200, we would be more incline to recommend it if you are looking for a low-end tablet.

For full review with pictures and video, click here.
[Nook Color General] darkmatter34:
I honestly really prefer how b&n did the nook color. Not wasting money on junk you don't need, and likely have on your phone anyway. Like ffc and gps, and use that money to give you a good screen, which is why you get a tablet to begin with, imo. More to watch movies and read.
[Nook Color General] Taosaur:
There's probably already a thread on it, but the new Vizio tablet is looking like a genuine contender in the NC's <$300 niche. Build quality seems decent, display and battery life (the usual Achilles' heel of budget tablets) are comparable to the NC, and it may have better stereo sound than the major-brand 10" tablets.

Add to that the IR blaster and 1080p HDMI out, as well as GPS and Gingerbread stock, and it easily outshines a stock NC, and depending on your priorities gives a CM7 NC a run for its money, too. The downsides are a slow custom UI, Netflix is so far a no-go, and no root (and everything that relies on root) as of yet. People are also finding the IR remote underwhelming, but basically functional. People are having trouble with video chat, too, which removes an advantage one would expect it to have over the NC.
[Nook Color General] LinuxParadigm:
Vizio Vtab1008 versus Nook Color

I own an NC running nightly CM7, and I just recently acquired a Vizio Vtab1008. The IPS screen on the NC is VASTLY superior to the Vizio - viewing angles on the Vizio are not particularly good. However, I do prefer the Vizio's 4:3 screen aspect ratio for web pages and apps.

Battery life for the Vizio is also not particularly good compared to the rooted NC running CM7. CM7 made huge improvements to sleep mode for the NC. The Vizio seems to be losing about 4% to 8% of battery life per hour with the screen turned off.

The Vizio has some of the features that I really miss in the NC - like a microphone, a camera, and 4:3 aspect ratio. I have great hopes and expectations for the Vizio once it is rooted.
[Nook Color General] duong_duc2002:
Does anyone in our forum use this low-end tablet and root it... If does, please share what you have done for me.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] jakoob_cz:
Hi Guys,

I'm making an article about SGS II and I've found out, that there is again issue with the accuracy of GPS position (like Galaxy S had).

First clue was the article on GSM arena:

The LG Optimus 2X got hold of between 7 and 9 satellites and used 7 of them most of the time. The reported accuracy settled at 5m and mostly stayed there with the occasional jump to 10m.

The HTC Sensation spotted 9 satellites and used them all (more satellites potentially lead to a better lock). Accuracy started at around 8m but quickly reached 3-4m and held steady. Note that this is reported accuracy, but actual accuracy should be proportional to these readings.

The Samsung Galaxy S II performed worst in this test, using all of the 6 satellites that it managed to detect. Reported accuracy went between 18m and 20m but varied quite a bit during the test (even though the phone was completely stationary).

I've used the same application and compare it with Xperia Arc. We were standing outside on one place. Finally I got about 30-40 feet on Galaxy SII (still changing). Xperia Arc started at 10 feet and quickly settled down to stable 3-4.

Does anyone has SGS II and some other Android phone to compare it? I'm curious, if this is problem in general or just few bad pieces on market.

Thanks for help...
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] EarlZ:
I tried GPS + Wireless Netwok assist, GPS test says 10 sats in view my location is not even accurate to 1Km
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] d3l1:
My GPS is great, never had an issue with accuracy. although I had to find out that my gps.conf says "north-america" as the default nntp pool instead of "europe" on a german (DBT) SGS2 is really strange, still my phone get's a cold lock with 10-20 seconds (10s standing still, 20s while driving).
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] LazeDK:
Mine is very fast and precise - I would say its 1 minute to locate me when im outside with wifi switched on.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] JJEgan:
Original firmware GPS test was May 2011 .

Lock cold boot never used GPS before

no Wifi No network no AGPS .

GPS only

4 min 8 sats locked on . Accuracy 13 metres ..

Subsequent lock on faster as expected and 5/10 m accuracy .

No further tests as it just works .

jje
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Hamst0r:
I use Navigon three times a week and i never got problems with my sgs2. The gps signal is like my iphone 4, i only navigate with the voice!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] bambollero:
Real world driving accuracy : 20-30 meters (can go down to 5-10m, but only in truly wide, open areas)

Lock Speed : few minutes

Barely usable as a navigator, at least in urban areas. The above are under KE7 and KF3. Really disappointed by the GPS performance on mine.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Cangir:
my gps works fine often i use wifi
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] EarlZ:
Changed my NTP server to asia, I can now even get a lock inside the house, sweet!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] jakoob_cz:
Guys, thanks for replies.

Anyway I think this issue won't appear that much on driving navigation, as this software "sticks" to the nearest road and use the speed to make the position as accurate as possible.

Bigger problem I see in terrain while searching for way home, or while playing with Geocaching. :mad:

Only positive thing is that from digging in ground at area 20-40 feet wide you will surely obtain big muscles :D
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RogerPodacter:
did you guys already look thru this thread? all the good info is in there too.

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1062225&highlight=gps+solved
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] jakoob_cz:
upps, I was trying to find simillar topic. Than maybe I would like to ask somebody to lock and delete this one.

Thanks...
[Thunderbolt General] bowtieduece:
Saw this just now. Was wondering if verizon can still remove apps when your rooted and if we can remove something to stop them.

http://www.gizmocrunch.com/mobile/7579-verizon-android-phone
[Thunderbolt General] mtuckman:
If Verizon starts removing apps without proof that they are malicious, that will be the last straw....
[Thunderbolt General] dms76:
It just said free wireless tethering app which is part their software on root phones
[Thunderbolt General] bthomp21:
they arent going to "hack" your phone. and if you are rooted, you arent getting the update.

i dont have it on my phone anymore, but not sure if its from the rom (bamf rc5) can someone confirm?
[Thunderbolt General] a-n-d-r-e-y:
i still have free wifi. rooted on bamf. using it everyday. absolutely no problems.
[Thunderbolt General] xEVILFREDx:
I would assume everyone here with custom roms will not get remote access. This is for user adding wireless tether via other source.
[Thunderbolt General] bthomp21:
i have wireless tether, i was talking about verizons mobile hotspot
[Thunderbolt General] bowtieduece:
" In addition, the company is removing unauthorized tethering apps from users phones."

That last part is what had me concerned not their hotspot app.
[Thunderbolt General] bogatyr:
It's through the update though. So if you're not stock, it shouldn't apply to you.
[Thunderbolt General] l7777:
That article is FUD. They just want to see people doing exactly what is happening in this thread. "OMFG VZW is evil, they're haxoring people's phones!"

Unless you have first hand experience, don't worry about it. What's more, people have no reason to complain. Teathering without paying is, and always has been, against Verizon's TOS. Do I agree with this? Nope, but I'm certainly not going to try and create a mass hysteria by saying OMG my app got removed! If it were to be removed and I wanted to use it, I'd find a way to re-install it. So will the others who actually care about such things. Anyone using the TB as their primary internet device in an LTE area should be happily paying $30/month for unlimited teathering. Most land based ISPs don't offer prices that good anymore.
[Thunderbolt General] bogatyr:
I couldn't agree more. I don't know what the fuss is all about regarding $30/mo for a connection worthy of replacing your home ISP. I switched from Comcast and I'm saving $30/mo now.
[Thunderbolt General] madsquabbles:
i don't mind paying the $30 (i did sign up for it), but it can't replace my home connection yet as i only have 3g (very bad signal too). i do get 4g when i visit my dad though, but he's got 10Gb/s cable there. i just got to, hopefully, lock in unlimited data if/when they get 4g in my city. then i'd be able to drop my home connection.
[Thunderbolt General] Mr. Transistor:
Yeah, id rather just pay $30 and not have to worry about anything
[Thunderbolt General] Schedonnardus:
the only time i would have a need for tethering is when i travel and the hotel internet is crap. That's not very often, so I really can't justify the $30.
[Thunderbolt General] RunNgun42:
Why should I be happy about paying twice for the same thing? Should comcast be able to charge you $60/month for each computer in your house? Afterall, having more than one pc online uses more bandwidth.
[Thunderbolt General] mike.s:
If the contract you sign for service says so, yes. The one you signed with Verizon says "no tethering," but they do offer that as an option. QuitYerBitchin.
[Thunderbolt General] bogatyr:
You're paying $30/mo for unlimited data on your phone, not any device you want. Read the terms you signed.

You're paying an extra $30/mo to support any device you want. If you're paying $60/mo with Comcast, that's saving you money!

If you don't agree with a license/contact, don't sign it. You don't have to use Verizon if you don't like their terms. You can also call and complain to them if you want.

Personally, I'm happy to save money and this deal lets me do that without breaking the contract I signed.
[Thunderbolt General] RunNgun42:
So if I buy a new car and the contract says "no connecting ipods" even though I own the car, I guess I should just accept it because I signed a contract? You're free to grab your ankles any time some company tells you to, however I will take matters into my own hands and do what is reasonably appropriate. You can sit there and take the holy route all you like, but I'm sure the day your home ISP, your home television provider, your home utilities provider, or any other service you subscribe to begins double dipping on charges because more than 1 person is taking advantage of them, you would raise HOLY HELL.

2 gigs is 2 gigs, it should not matter how you consume them. I can just as easily watch a few netflix movies on my phone until I hit the cap, just as much as I can tether to hit my cap. What difference could it possibly make how I use those 2 GB's? It doesnt. People like you are the reason these insane policies are developed in the first place, because businesses prey off your ignorance and fear to challenge them.

I dont care about a contract I signed. The contract is garbage and deserves to be broken.
[Thunderbolt General] Song0330:
No one forced you to sign that contract. If you don't like the terms, you're welcome to not give them your business and go elsewhere. That's how business works :)

This reminds me of that scene from The Empire Strikes Back:

Darth Vader: Calrissian. Take the princess and the Wookie to my ship.

Lando: You said they'd be left at the city under my supervision!

Darth Vader/RunNgun42: I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further.
[Thunderbolt General] mike.s:
You'll have to do better than that. For a car, a contract would be a sales contract, and such a term would make no sense. OTOH, the warranty terms could say the the radio (or even the whole car, for that matter) is no longer covered if an iPod were ever connected.

That tells us all that you're an antisocial reprobate, not worth any more of our time.
[Thunderbolt General] bogatyr:
A car is not a service you pay for, it is a product you buy. You can get it as a service (lease or rent) and they charge you for breaking the erms in those cases (I.e. smoking, above mileage, etc.).
[Thunderbolt General] ksmitchell:
Well technically Verizon would be in the wrong for removing apps from your phone. You did in fact purchase the phone and are leasing the service. They have no right removing apps from the phone as it is not leased to you. If they don't want people to "steal" internet they need to go about it a different way by coming up with a way to block the service on there end not removing apps on the hardware you paid for.
[Thunderbolt General] nrfitchett4:
what a ridiculous article. No where did they prove that verizon is removing apps from peoples phones that they didn't put there in the first place. All verizon did was take away the free hotspot that they had told us was a temp thing anyways.

Wonder how much traffic that site gets. I would guess not much...
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
You sir are now my favorite anti toll :-P
[Thunderbolt General] crazyhtown:
No one can remote into your phone and remove programs..sigh
[Thunderbolt General] JBO1018:
Choosing to not commit theft of service does not equal bending over and taking it. "I take matters into my own hands and do what is appropriate" Really?? Stealing is doing what is appropriate? I don't fully agree with their system but trying to say you are in the right for stealing service because you don't agree with your carriers policy is preposterous.

Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt
[Thunderbolt General] MordyT:
Yes they can. Built into android is a remote app install and remote app deletion. In fact, the market on your phone uses both of them. The market on the web uses remote install and google has already pulled apps off a phone that were dangerous using the remote delete. The only question is if verizon has any access to that system....

Via my HTC Thunderbolt
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
No, and they're not deleting tethering apps using Googles remote killswitch.
[Thunderbolt General] mike.s:
Google != Verizon Wireless.
[Thunderbolt General] MordyT:
@ the two people above me.

Read what I wrote and who I quoted. I did not say big red was doing it, I said it was not technically impossible for it to be done.

And no kidding google isn't big red. I never said it was...

And yes, google does cooperate with carriers at times, although not in this case...

Via my HTC Thunderbolt
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
I wasn't saying you were wrong, you're right I was just saying Verizon isn't using Google's kill switch ;)
[Thunderbolt General] KingTUT55:


I must say I don't want to get into this really but technically its not stealing its just breaking the "bargain" so to speak as in breaching a contract

Common law sees breaching a contract as necessary tools in business, but you should be required to pay or meet the cover/market price of the cost of your breach, or the value of the benefit conferred (restitution); however, enforcement is a duty of the parties involved according to civil procedure or the processes of civil courts and civil law. As to the issue of not doing business with them, if you don't agree to their terms and should go elsewhere: that would be fine and true and proper in pure capitalism where there is an equal level of knowledge and bargaining power, but we don't have that luxury in a region with only one mobile lte "4G" provider, and preformed "form" contracts that are both procedurally and substantively unconscionable precisely because we can't go into verizon and bargain with them.
[Thunderbolt General] KidJoe:
Right you are...

They are playing into the "Verizon will be pushing a software update to remove the free mobile hotspot promo" speak that was going around since VZW had announced the promo "Free MHS" was a limited time thing...

Further, if VZW pushed an update that removed the MHS feature from the phone, as this article states...

Then how would VZW be able to charge customers their $$$ for tethering the "VZW approved" way?

It seems more likely that VZW has a "switch" at their end like they do for "feature phones" and "smart phones" when they enable/disable the Mobile Broadband Connect (aka tethering) feature add-on.
[Thunderbolt General] TabGuy:
I believe your analogy to be flawed. Yes you own both the car and the phone. You can do what you want to either one.

However, you don't own the street or the network.

Per your analogy, since you own the car you should be able to go any speed you want on the roadway. But, of course, you can't since you don't own the roadway. You must abide by the rules of the road.

Same holds true of the Verizon network. You can't use the network anyway you want since you don't don't own the network.
[Thunderbolt General] bennymic:
I just caught my rooted phone updating something from verizon. I stopped it before it bricked with my custom kernel.
[Thunderbolt General] yareally:
Has verizon removed your wifi tether? (rooted phones)

Yes, they came to my house in the middle of the night and removed it while I was asleep mission impossible style :(
[Thunderbolt General] timned88:
too bad they didn't remove your mortgage too!
[Thunderbolt General] nrfitchett4:
Why would your rooted phone auto update? You have to approve updates.
[Thunderbolt General] yareally:
My neighbor with an at&t contract wasn't as lucky ;)
[Thunderbolt General] JBO1018:
I'm not going to go into a big thing here but, no that is not the case. This has nothing to do with the contract. Verizon offers a service, tethering, for a specified fee. If you use that service and choose to not pay the fee you ARE stealing. It's called theft of service, and it is no different than breaking into the box outside your apartment to hook up some free cable. Your contract with Verizon is irrelevant other than the fact I'm sure by signing it you agreed to PAY for tethering.

Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
Not only has it been mentioned that you need to approve the update.. a custom kernel will probably be one of the last things to brick your phone.
[Thunderbolt General] hunterjackson92:
I could.be wrong but I thought the $30 a month was for only 1 gig of hotspots usage which is the ridiculous part but correct me if im wrong
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
If you're grandfathered in to unlimited data, your $30 gives you unlimited hotspot.
[Thunderbolt General] RunNgun42:
I can tell the people defending their tethering plans are only doing so so as not to feel like idiots for paying for something which they know deep down inside should be free. So you didnt like my car analogy, well then I'll go back to the other 5 I gave. Do you feel comcast should be able to charge you a per pc fee instead of 1 flat rate to use their services in your house? If I pay $60/month for internet access by myself, should you have to pay $240/month for THE EXACT SAME ACCESS but distributed to your family of 4?

I'm not defending people who use the unlimited plans and burn up 200GB/month using their cellphones for home internet access. Clearly a PC will consume more data than a cellphone, and thus VZW feels you should pay for that luxury, especially since it increases strain on their networks.

What I am talking about is people who have the caps. A 2 gigabyte cap is a finite amount. Why should it matter how you eat up this cap? I could accidentally let Pandora stream all week until I hit the cap just as quickly as I could tether to my laptop and surf the internet from work. Once the cap is hit, I am shut off. So why does it matter how I get there?

I am NOT increasing network load, verizon is NOT having to spend money to build infrastructure due to my use, other users are NOT suffering quality loss due to my actions. Absolutely nothing is impacted in any way whatsoever. This is no different than being charged twice for any of your home utilities.

As I started, I think this argument simply boils down to the fact some people willfully let themselves get ripped off, and then defend it because they dont want to feel like fools in the process. You know not too long ago Apple used to forbid you from jailbreaking your phone. They bullied their customers and duped them into thinking this was ILLEGAL. People stood up to the system and instituted change THEMSELVES, to the point a judge had to intervene and decry that jailbreaking is in fact perfectly legal and apple needs to go **** themselves. This whole tethering nonsense falls into the same vein.

There is no THEFT taking place here. The technology exists within the phone WHICH I OWN. Verizon is not at a loss because I choose to tether, and they certainly are not offering me any sort of service. I already pay for the service, the wireless transmission of data across the airwaves. How I choose to receive that data is really none of their business.
[Thunderbolt General] joshnichols189:
Dude. It doesn't matter what you think, doesn't matter how you feel about Verizons plans, and it doesn't matter what anyone else here thinks including me. Verizon is providing service and they are charging for the ability to use it on the computer through them. That's all that matters. If you are taking something for free that isn't free, you are stealing no matter how you try to word it to make yourself feel better. I'm not going to say I don't tether, because I do. Is it right that I am circumventing Verizon? No, it's not no matter how I try to make myself feel better about it by saying "well my cable Internet service isn't run like this so it's not fair that my telco is, I can use my data how I want," etc.

And once again given your fail analogy, I shouldn't have to pay a data plan for my family, because they're on my family plan? Wtf?
[Thunderbolt General] bthomp21:
verizon wont do much unless you are part of the top 5% of data usage.
[Thunderbolt General] JBO1018:
I don't have a tethering plan. All of your anologys are pointless because I don't think anyone disagreed that paying for tethering sucks and it seems unfair in a way. I never said I think your a horrible person or that I even slightly agreed with Verizons tethering plans. Ill tell you a secret. I could not care less about you stealing free tethering, but don't come in here and act like your not doing anything wrong. Like you have the right to do whatever you want because you disagree with the policy and that everyone who pays for the service legally is some dumb, dim witted moron. Grow up and join the real world. Laws apply to EVERYONE, not just those who agree with them.

Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt
[Thunderbolt General] nrfitchett4:
Not to mention that while jailbreaking your iphone may not be illegal, it can void your warranty. Just like using tethering for free might not be illegal, but verizon can cancel your service and your contract.