yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[General Topics] mistermentality:
You are mistaken. The abuser of the system is apple who use patents without paying the fees and when they get caught they promise in court to pay but still never do but because they say they will they get away with it.

Motorola are not abusing the system by allowing their patents to be used and to be fair to them most people would want money for what they were owed.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] xdaid:
Actually apple is THE major company in US and all over the world, it's even richer than ExxonMobil and the other oil companies (i put a link some posts above).

All that money makes apple believe they can do everything they want, and probably they can since even the US patent system is now part of apple's marketing stategy.
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
Your bias is noted. Thanks.
[General Topics] lowandbehold:
Apple is going to wake a sleeping giant. Google is stockpiling patents. Apple has patented things that they didn't even create (slide to unlock)! Oh, and tell me how pulldown notifications are a standard patent? Because Google is about to be awarded that patent.

And Apple obviously is starting to fear Google. Did you know they actually tried to file an injunction against the Motorola patents saying Google shouldn't be allowed to use them? Now that is funny.
[General Topics] mistermentality:
I'm afraid you seem to be the one with bias.

How is it not biased of you to defend apple patenting other peoples work, to say that it is ok for them to not pay the money they owe to those whose frand patents they use, to excuse apples refusal to even licence its patentd for use and yet then say motorola, who do allow theirs to be used, is not allowed to want higher payment from a company who have not paid what they already owe?

You do understand that your comments suggest either a misunderstanding of apples actions or a bias toward them which would naturally lead you to conclude that their actions are fine yet those of anyone who opposes them are wrong?

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] MissionImprobable:
Your bias towards Apple in every thread you post in is noted. It's not even funny how blind you are to FACTS.

Fact is that Apple violated FRAND, got called on it and now is trying to fight having to pay for the time in which they were in violation. Any other company would have paid up long ago. I really don't even understand while you're on the forums because the majority of your posts seem to be trying to spread your misguided gospel of Apple. Even people on Apple forums are tired of Apple trying to use litigation to take the place of innovation. Your trolling is weak and obvious.
[General Topics] ladyhaly:
Look in the mirror, monkey. What I have to say has been already said by two previous posters. I suggest you lay aside your iFanboy-ism and try to gain a better understanding of the world. Of what company did which and the effect the company's actions on users. That includes a study of ecosystems and work ethics.

I am sincerely hoping you just misunderstood the whole thing which led you to say such ridiculous statements.
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
Imm not trolling. I use both apple and android devices. Both are good products. I dumped the iPhone 4s because I wanted a bigger phone. Now I have the Galaxy S3 & love it.

The point is all companies have dirt. Apple is not the only bad one around. Google is not perfect either. If Google was trying to defend their patent then I would say they have a right to as well. Any company should.
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
Thanks
[General Topics] MissionImprobable:
Yet you say Motorola is in the wrong for wanting its FRAND rights enforced. You're drunk.
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
I'm on the clock. I can't drink. The comment was uncalled for.

I'm not saying their wrong till the investigation is complete. I also don't think the nexus should be banned until all is said & done. & apple should pony up more than $96 mil if they were in the wrong. It's not just sales that were/will be affected.
[General Topics] MissionImprobable:
That specific investigation is complete and Apple needs to pay up. Whatever time of day it is it is clear that you're drunk on the old Apple Kool-Aid.
[General Topics] taz1458:
This isn't anything but typical Apple. When their company is bankrupt because they think they own everything and run the world, I'm just going to sit back and laugh with my android. Screw those guys.
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
It's clear you just want to call names & attack. So I guess we're done.
[General Topics] mistermentality:
I think his point is that even though its proved that apple owe frand patent fees and they refuse to pay them you seem to be excusing that as if it is fine and yet you are criticising motorola for requiring higher fees to help recuperate what apple owe them.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
I never excused it. Everyone should get what they are owed. If you have a patent, you are allowed to protect it, regardless of what some armchair patent lawyers think they know. If you have fees due to you, then you deserve them. The point is that not everyone is innocent.
[General Topics] xaccers:
So how is Motorola abusing FRAND?

Apple used the technology without paying for it, Motorola are therefore entitled to charge what they like for the backpay.

Had Apple done what other manufacturers did and adhere to the FRAND agreement, paying a fair and reasonable cost to use the technology, they wouldn't be in this mess.
[General Topics] john_tillman:
Thanks for the correction. Well, crux of the matter is that - it was a business deal in which PARC got a chance to invest in a pre-IPO company for a discount (if timed correctly by PARC, they had to have made millions out of their $1 million investment) and in return they allowed them to take a look at what they had and do whatever they wanted to do. Basically, PARC had no desire to create GUI for personal devices - they were genius scientist that just prototype new stuff and gave it to other companies for commercialization). So, ultimately, unlike popular belief that they copied/stole those ideas.

---------- Post added at 06:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 PM ----------

Don't insult fisher price. When you'll have kids - they'll come to rescue.

---------- Post added at 06:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:09 PM ----------

It is FRAND, an injunction is highly unlikely. Motorola just was denied injunction for xbox 360.
[General Topics] mistermentality:
Its funny that the only companies accusing motorola of frand abuse are also the only two who happen to have used patents without paying for their use. They are simply trying to escape paying what they owe.

However that worked for apple in germany where the courts ruled motorola can't sue apple over their not paying frand fees.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] john_tillman:
The speed at which Samsung is forking android and google is burning cash on it without making money I am afraid android in its current state also won't last long unless Google seriously makes some changes with regard to carriers/hw manufacturers.

Nexus 7 was introduce not to compete with iPad but to prevent forking of android the way Amazon did. And, don't underestimate it - but, an amazon phone may already be in the works which would look nothing like android.
[General Topics] MissionImprobable:
It's funny--in a disgusting way--how quickly U.S. courts are to jump to the rescue of the largest U.S. companies in the wrong with claims that patents are too strict or incorrectly applied but it's all gravy when those same companies want to go after their competitors. I don't support MS anymore than I have to considering that there is still some IP-mongering on their end, but Apple is the new satan.
[General Topics] c5satellite2:
And they don't even pay their fair share of US taxes! Apparently they feel they can do whatever they want, no matter who they screw over! MS should have let them go out of business in the late 90's-early 2000 instead of giving them cash hand over fist to keep crApple afloat and the DOJ off of MS backs. If crApple had gone under, MS would have been cut up by the DOJ for having a monopoly. Stupid MS.
[General Topics] MissionImprobable:
Proof in the pudding. Google's ammo in pictures. Again, oh so glad that they decided to patent notifications.

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=28209371&postcount=1
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
Everything they do is 100% original right?
[General Topics] mistermentality:
This patent was applied for three years ago and is still pending, it isn't helping google at all until it is approved which is not guaranteed.

Even when it is approved apple have a get out clause because in america the status of patent pending does not prevent someone copying and making use of that patented idea. If apple were to patent it and get it approved then google would actually owe them.

History shows that patent rights can easily be usurped. Marconi patented radio long after Tesla did yet with the financial backing of Edison Marconi had Teslas patents thrown out and his replaced them.

Decades later Teslas patents were reinstated over Marconis but it shows that it can happen so don't be surprised if apple don't get sued for using something that is only patent pending not approved.

I personally suspect apple will not be sued at all for this and that they may patent it themselves somehow as they did with unified searching and multitasking.

Unfortunately it is not the silver bullet people are hoping for to stop the lawsuits against android.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] xdaid:
The story is a bit controversial (since Marconi for first gave the radio an effective application by transmitting signals on the long range) but one thing is clear:

"Tesla was embroiled in other problems at the time, but when Marconi won the Nobel Prize in 1911, Tesla was furious. He sued the Marconi Company for infringement in 1915, but was in no financial condition to litigate a case against a major corporation. It wasn't until 1943—a few months after Tesla's death— that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tesla's radio patent number 645,576. The Court had a selfish reason for doing so. The Marconi Company was suing the United States Government for use of its patents in World War I. The Court simply avoided the action by restoring the priority of Tesla's patent over Marconi."

As you can see even at that time the court took decisions based off money and national interest, first against Tesla (money) and later against Marconi (national interest). Things like justice are definitely not involved in those disputes... sad.
[General Topics] mistermentality:
It is disappointing that patents can be recinded almost on a whim when money is involved and with Apples vast fortune it does make me wonder if any deals were done in order to get certain patents on things that pre date apples patent applications.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] mistermentality:
I did quite a lot of research and found examples of prior art that predate three of apples key patents they use against android.

I did it for my blog but I mention it here because it shows Apple did not invent these things nor were they first to use them.

Google may or may not be one hundred percent original but apple certainly cannot claim to be either.

Dave

( http://www.google.com/producer/editions/CAownKXmAQ/bigfatuniverse )
[General Topics] monkeyluis:
I agree. As long as we agree Google has not had 100% originality.
[General Topics] lowandbehold:
You would be hard pressed to find any product or software that has 100% originality. It's not all about being original, it is about being innovative. To take something and improve upon it. That is how the world has worked since the dawn of mankind. Caveman 1 used a stick to kill his meat. Caveman 2 sharpened the stick to kill his meat. Caveman 3 shot his sharpened stick from a bow to kill his meat. That is how innovation works.
[General Topics] neyenlives:
I was going to say....what does 100% original have to do with anything.....
[General Topics] xdaid:
Unfortunately the name of caveman 3 was apple, he claimed that the bow and EVEN THE STICK was for exclusive use because of the intellectual property. Ok got to go now, i have to kill my meat with bare hands.
[General Topics] GR36:
They have now been granted a patent on head mounted displays.....

A law suit against Google glass incoming..
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] alkspo:
how do i change the bootanimation in cm7? i tried it the stock way which i used before by putting it in system/media and even tried data/local, but now my phone boots up black. help?
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] Majkio:
And that is about to be the only grant permissions rw-r-r

And everything should work
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] voetbalremco:
You should only have 1. At system/media
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] alkspo:
i know, i tried system/media and it didnt work, so i moved it to data/local and it didnt work...

will try changing permissions
[HTC One S] mike6669:
I've set up my proxy via wifi settings so I can use it as and when I want but does anyone know how to set up a proxy that would also kick in when using mobile connection?

My VPN works fine but the proxy is more reliable when streaming overseas tv.

Im unrooted with a TMo HTC One S
[HTC One S] mike6669:
Anyone?
[Xperia Arc Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Erhany:
Guys i really got bored this apktool compile errors!

I tried a lot of apktool manager .jar aapt versions but result is same!

1.apk referred to my framework-res.apk on Xperia ARC!

I can decompile but can not compile..

Im searching xda and google for a result but theres not any chances..

JDK SDK(full from 4.1 to 1.5/6) JDR JAVA latest versions..

All I want to edit xml's from SystemUI.apk but with no changes cant compile too..

heres the log

I: Smaling...

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException

at org.jf.util.PathUtil.getRelativeFile(PathUtil.java :44)

at org.jf.smali.smaliFlexLexer.getSourceName(smaliFle xLexer.java:2569)

at org.antlr.runtime.CommonTokenStream.getSourceName( CommonTokenStream.java:345)

at org.antlr.runtime.tree.CommonTreeNodeStream.getSou rceName(CommonTreeNodeStream.java:106)

at org.antlr.runtime.tree.TreeParser.getSourceName(Tr eeParser.java:78)

at org.jf.smali.smaliTreeWalker.getErrorHeader(smaliT reeWalker.java:349)

at org.antlr.runtime.BaseRecognizer.displayRecognitio nError(BaseRecognizer.java:192)

at org.antlr.runtime.BaseRecognizer.reportError(BaseR ecognizer.java:186)

at org.jf.smali.smaliTreeWalker.smali_file(smaliTreeW alker.java:428)

at brut.androlib.mod.SmaliMod.assembleSmaliFile(Smali Mod.java:85)

at brut.androlib.src.DexFileBuilder.addSmaliFile(DexF ileBuilder.java:43)

at brut.androlib.src.DexFileBuilder.addSmaliFile(DexF ileBuilder.java:33)

at brut.androlib.src.SmaliBuilder.buildFile(SmaliBuil der.java:64)

at brut.androlib.src.SmaliBuilder.build(SmaliBuilder. java:48)

at brut.androlib.src.SmaliBuilder.build(SmaliBuilder. java:35)

at brut.androlib.Androlib.buildSourcesSmali(Androlib. java:222)

at brut.androlib.Androlib.buildSources(Androlib.java: 179)

at brut.androlib.Androlib.build(Androlib.java:170)

at brut.androlib.Androlib.build(Androlib.java:154)

at brut.apktool.Main.cmdBuild(Main.java:182)

at brut.apktool.Main.main(Main.java:67)

I tried decompilin with original apktool and compile back ICSapktool too. no success..

Im on GB but havng same errors on ICS too!
[Xperia Arc Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] popthosegaskets:
Update aapt.exe, grab it from your android sdk folder and place inside apktool dir, old aapt.exe has known bugs that prevent it from recompiling.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
[KERNEL] SGH-I747 (Galaxy S III AT&T) ROOTED INSECURE KERNELS - Latest: I747UCALEM

Hi Guys,

Here you can find rooted stock kernels (without any modifications, only "insecure" root added) for AT&T's USA version of Galaxy S III (SGH-I747).

This WILL rise your custom binary counter.

Insecure Means that adb daemon on phone is working as root. If you need more answers on what is insecure kernel, search over xda forums, the answer is there.

To flash, use latest ODIN (3.07) : Download Here!

*LATEST* - I747UCALEM

Enjoy!

Instructions:

- Run odin
- unpack zip (you should see .tar file inside)
- point to this TAR file in odin as PDA
- click flash
- done
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jiggytom:
So flashing any kernels from CWM will trip the counter? I thought only flashing through odin will...

By not tripping our counter and getting CWM, I thought we can flash anything without tripping counter (kernels, radios, roms etc)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
Counter will be topped up when:

You flash insecure (repacked) kernel image - no matter how you will do it.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] appdroid:
Nice start
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
Error 404
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
Thanks!, nice sig ;P
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
fixed link, sorry
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jdbeitz:
Awesome start man
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] SeV034:
Since this is insecure can custom boot animation be used?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
No, this is pure stock kernel without any mods. Maybe later, but maybe only. I just dont have device to test it. Donate $$ or even device for me then i will be more active :)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jdbeitz:
Wait. This isn't cwm flashable. I'm confused. :D
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
This is ODIN flashable.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jdbeitz:
Doh. :)

I'll see if HTM and myself can make it cwm flashable for ya :)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] howtomen:
Here ya Go!:

flash in CWM if ur flash happy
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jdbeitz:
well that was fast.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jiggytom:
So this trips the counter? So no way to flash custom kernels without tripping counter? What can we flash then? Only Roms? Radios?
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] howtomen:
cwm wont trip counter
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] jiggytom:
So the OP was wrong in one of his posts in the thread....

"Counter will be topped up when:

You flash insecure (repacked) kernel image - no matter how you will do it."
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] dmunjal:
Will this wipe a stock phone?
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] Artimus009:
It's just a kernel that is rooted and insecure.

SGS3 awaiting some dev love
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
I thought all unsecured kernels allowed custom boot animation?
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
Insecure == allows adb remount by default. which means that adb on phone is working as root. If you need more answers on what is insecure kernel, search over xda forums, the answer is there :)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] dave1977nj:
I'll donate my Motorola RAZR V3 :laugh:
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
My wife got one ;) Pink ;) hehehe it's a good phone ;)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] zmore:
Hah, and my wife is STILL using her ancient pink razr. :) ... she likes the tiny size, and that it's just a simple cheapo phone. Trying to get her to upgrade so we can do cooler android to android stuff, but, nah...
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
Just FYI to others.

I flashed a t-mobile kernel on my AT&T SIII.

Phone booted fine but force-closed on login.

So nothing scary bad happened.

I restored from Nandroid and all is well again.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
it may happen, but shouldnt. Are you sure before flashing kernel u werent using modded rom/kernel?
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] Romanbb:
Any brave AT&T testers wanna see if this kernel will boot up without FCs?
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] anilkuj:
I tried this one , flashable zip won't work , not near a PC to try the Odin version. In the meanwhile waiting for your att port of Adams kernel :)
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] shortydoggg:
?

??

Which one is it?? That's confusing.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] howtomen:
Cwm will not trip counter....

im on my phone. expect terrible typos.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] nakedninja42:
CWM recovery mode will not trip the counter since.

If you flash using ODIN in download mode, it will trip the counter.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
I just flashed the odin/tar listed in the OP if that's what you're referring to.

Worked great for me.

Can't wait to see your ATT port of your kernel!!! :D
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] nakedninja42:
No, he is referring to the kernel he made listed in Tmobile sgs3 dev section.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
I don't think so. Because I already posted in his kernel thread yesterday that I tried it. I also gave info on the results, which were FC's on bootup.

I also said the same thing in this thread, several posts up.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] nakedninja42:
He posted same question on twitter this morning and thats what I just tested for him an hour or so ago through twitter ... wouldn't get past splashscreen for me... :cyclops:
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
@nakedninja:

If you will flash ORYGINAL kernel/rom/modem using odin, then your counter will NOT top up.

If you flash ANY NON ORYGINAL kernel/rom/modem using odin, then your counter WILL TOP UP.

If you flash anything using CWM on SGS3 (other sgs'ses got different in this case) no counter will be topped up.

Clear?

So stop confusing people to not use odin. This is Samsung Service program not some mumbo jumbo custom recovery.

Adam
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] Romanbb:
I'm not talking about the TMO version. I have made a separate version for ATT that needs to be tested
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] CZ Eddie:
My bad.

I PM'd you my email if you're looking for another ATT SIII tester.

PM or email work fine. :good:
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] nakedninja42:
I agree 100%, the only thing I forgot to mention was the original/unoriginal in ODIN. Thanks for making it clearer for others.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
Roman, this one was tested by my testers and works fine flashed with odin. No FC's :). My other kernels for SGS3 (Sprint and TMO) are working also. :) ENjoy!

Adam
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] creepyncrawly:
Just for clarification for myself.

On the SGS II, the only thing that "tops" the flash counter is flashing a NON ORIGINAL kernel in Odin (or Heimdall). Flashing a modified system image does NOT "top" the flash counter, just the kernel. (Btw, there is no such thing as a non original modem.)

So, on SGS III, flashing a modified system image does increment the flash counter? Is this verified, or is this speculation? I'm well aware that the Samsung software engineers can rewrite the bootloader code to function however they want. SGS III doesn't necessarily have to be like the SGS II.
[AT&T, Rogers, Bell, Telus Samsung Galaxy S III] AdamLange:
I think it checks the kernel, i dont own the ATT device here. Just check it :)