yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[HTC EVO 3D] zachdees:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0PG07J7194

seems pretty legit

i also havent ever seen anything fake on Newegg
[HTC EVO 3D] Scougar:
Brand of the battery is eForCity (or at least the peeps selling it). So it doesn't appear to be an 'official' HTC battery. Could you possibly take the 'official' label off your thread title?

For $7.81 I HIGHLY doubt it's a true 2000mah battery. (feel free to try one and report back though :good:)
[HTC EVO 3D] spaceosc:
Couldn't find ANY official extended battery for the EVO 3D from Sprint or HTC, and the picture is clearly picturing an NON OEM and NON name brand battery. so no, do not buy this thinking it will be 2000MAH, you will have better luck buying a regular OEM HTC battery.

Newegg does sell official OEM extended batteries for EVO 4G, bought it for my bro and it was extremely impressive. 10 bucks for twice the battery life... wish it were that easy for my EVO 3D :(

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA08R05S7718
[HTC EVO 3D] bsoplinger:
I thought both the 4G and 3D took the same battery, no?

Sent from my Sprint Evo View 4G (PG41200) using Xparent Purple Tapatalk 2
[HTC EVO 3D] SorryGoFish:
The original (WiMax) Evo 4G does not have the same size battery as the 3D. I don't know about the new, (LTE) Evo though.
[HTC EVO 3D] P_M_G:
How is this "official" when it's clearly not an OEM battery and is even listed in the details as "AFTERMARKET"???
[HTC EVO 3D] nolimit06:
Since we are talking batteries I am looking at getting a extra battery. What does everyone recommend that would fit with the stock case? I am not looking for extra bulk just a nice replacement on the cheap if possible. :)
[HTC EVO 3D] spaceosc:
http://www.amazon.com/Anker®1900mAh...e=UTF8&qid=1341947928&sr=1-78&keywords=evo+3d

Anker is the only cheap brand name i trust at the moment, bought two TMO SGS2 Batteries for my girl and they are slightly better than stock, (2200mah VS 1800mah) as promised by Anker, cost me 20 bucks for both. so i would expect this 1900mah Battery to do slightly better, and then u have two batteries :D.. try to get yourself a independent battery changer, there like 5 bucks at most on Ebay. or just buy this bundle.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B3RFTU

the charger is great, but also a little cumbersome (since its adjustable rather than fixed for one size), its great because u can charge virtually any cellphone battery with it... including anyones you know.... except if they own an iPHONE lmao :D
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Mike724:
I followed the tutorial on how to unlock the bootloader on briefmobile (can't post full link due to board restrictions), it's the one located in the "[ROOT] 1.85 One Click Root! - ACT NOW, MAY NOT LAST FOREVER!" topic

There were no errors, and everything seems to have run fine. However I had to go through the getting started screen again and redownload all my apps, ect. :confused:

Is this normal? If not, is my device still fine, is it unlocked?

Additional info: All of my pictures were saved, and the ti83.rom I put in DCIM folder for Andie graph (calculator emulator) also was not deleted
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] GrandAdmiral:
The instructions tell you that unlocking your bootloader will erase data on your phone (with the exception of the phone storage). It gives you one final warning on screen saying the same.

Best way to check if you're unlocked is to reboot into the bootloader. "Unlocked" will appear at the top.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] _MetalHead_:
Perfectly normal.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Mike724:
Alright so to check I would press and hold the power and volume down buttons to enter the bootloader?

I figured it out, used adb reboot bootloader, it says tampered and unlocked
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] iElvis:
As the saying goes, this is a feature not a bug.

HTC does it that way to protect your phone from getting hacked. Unlocking erasing all data on the phone.
[General Questions and Answers] chrisgibs:
Hi guys,

My carrier is Digicel in Barbados (Caribbean), i asked what frequencies they used for 3G and 4G on their facebook page and they responded that the frequencies are 900,1800 & 2100.

Which fequencies are used for what? I think 900 & 2100 are 3G but i'm not 100% sure and i'm lost about the 4G frequency.

Thanks for any help.
[General Questions and Answers] KayxGee1:
I believe 3G works on the 900mhz band. Everything is is just EDGE.
[General Questions and Answers] mike12489:
en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Digicel#Caribbean_and_Central_American_Operations (remove space in ". org"):

GSM (EDGE (2G)): 900/1800/1900 MHz

UMTS (3G): 1900 MHz

HSDPA (4G) will (almost) definitely use 2100 MHz.

I don't know too much about the specifications behind 4G, but I'm pretty sure it utilizes two bands simultaneously. A few of the bands commonly used for 4G are 850, 1700, 1900, and 2100 MHz, so you'll often see something like HSDPA 850/1900 or 1700/2100. I don't know what Digicel Barbados would be using alongside 2100 MHz.
[General Questions and Answers] -m3tac0rt3x-:
Well it depends from country to country, because each country uses some frequencies to something (ex. TDT), and mobile phone companies need to reserve the frequencies to use them on their services.

In Portugal, at the moment, LTE uses the 2600 Mhz frequency (Standart for Europe), but when TDT is fully implemented and analog signal is completely turned off, LTE will also use 850 Mhz frequency because it can offer better coverage indoors (comparing to the 2600 Mhz).

In Barbados I have no ideia, but if you know the name of the National Communications Authority (in Portugal it's called ANACOM), search on their website for information about the frequencies used by the mobile operators.
[General Questions and Answers] chrisgibs:
I'll check this out, thanks guys.:good:
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] anmol7ify:
Is Motorola defy and defy+ officially supported by cyanogen for new cm9 RC builts? Edit: can we expect new cm10 unofficial builts??
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] hsrars-d:
Rule #1 on CyanogenMod:

NO ETA

and defy is not officially supported (yet?)
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] anmol7ify:
Edited...

My post now...
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] hsrars-d:
I think we can expect JellyBean builds by Epsylon3, he posted somewhere--
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] MotorolaDefyLuke:
Eppy said Cm9 RC1 would be incoming for the defy on the cm9 thread
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] anmol7ify:
U mean official cyanogenmod9?
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] MotorolaDefyLuke:
Yes, read the cm9 post
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] anmol7ify:
Link plz...give me the post's link...anyone?

And if we get ics officially from cyanogen...cm10 will be available for us..i just read that devices with official cm9 support will have cm10 as well. [Official cyanogen announcement ]
[Defy Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] zakoo2:
ibthink its still questionable that we will get official cm support, but id say that well definitely get jb (cm10) builds by eppy and quarx, since they managed to get cm9 working with full hwa, and afaik jb is not that different driver/sw wise. only uncertain thing is project butter, and that depends on whether its possible to port it via kernel modules.

sent from my cm9 defy...
[Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] barisko:
I'm not a developer myself, but I'm wondering if it is possible to prevent an app to show up in the task manager? In other words: is it possible to create an app that does not show up in the task manager?

I think this would be very usefull feature for certain apps that run in the background and have an icon in the notification area.

---

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201
[Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Markuzy:
Why will you want that for? Curious me.

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Xparent ICS Tapatalk 2
[Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] barisko:
If I think of MS Windows, there are a lot of programs that can minimize to the system tray. I notice that apps on Android, while they have an icon in the notification area (which in my opinion is comparable with the Windows system tray) to access them by, they also appear in the task switcher. Personally I think it would be great for apps to be accessible in the notification area and no longer show up in the task switcher. This will keep the task switcher cleaner while the app is still easily accessible.

I'm asking because I'm curious if this is even possible with Android. If so, I could suggest this to app developers.

---

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201
[Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Varience:
This is only possible if the Task Manager contain an exclusion list for you to select which app you want to exclude from being shown.

However, the default "Task Manager" does not have that feature.

Its also not possible to modify an app to make it hide itself from the task manager unless you are able to edit the app through code to tell it to exclude itself.
[Thinkpad Tablet General] SoonerLater:
Can't get ICS to install.

I hadn't used my Thinkpad Tablet in a few months, so I just learned that ICS had been released for this device. I first set Voodoo Rootkeeper to preserve root, then manually checked for System Updates and it found that 0089 had never been applied. It applied that successfully. After installed, I verified that root was preserved, then tried several times to do the same to get the ICS update (A400_03_0069_0130_US), but it always failed, so I put the update ZIP and XML files in the root of a FAT32 SD Card and then booted into recovery. After booting into recovery, I first wiped the cache, then wiped data/factory reset, then tried to "apply update form external storage." It saw A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip and I ran it. This is the error that it returned.

-- Install /sdcard...

Finding update package...

Opening update package...

Verifying update package...

Installing update...

assert failed: file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0065_0128_US:user/release-keys" || file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0069_0130_US:user/release-keys"

E:Error in /tmp/sideload/package.zip

(Status 7)

Installation aborted.

I read in another thread that this error arises when a previous update did not complete correctly. My system about shows ThinkPadTablet_A310_02_0039_0089_US

I read in another thread that if you edit META-INF/com/google/android/

updater-script

in ThinkPadTablet_A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip by removing this line:

assert(file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:3.1/ThinkPadTablet_A310_02/0039_0089_ROW:user/release-keys" ||

file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0069_0121_ROW:user/release-keys");

that the update won't perform the check that is tripping me up. I tried that, but then it failed when a critical file was not the size that the updater expected.

I am rooted, but I'm turning off root (using RootKeeper) before trying to install the updated. I don't remember ever installing anything else (like CWM or CMR). I don't understand why my update is failing.

Any suggestions?
[Thinkpad Tablet General] SoonerLater:
The contents of my currently installed /System/Build.Prop file are in the code box below. This was copied straight off of my TpT and pasted here, so it's the real deal, character for character. Does anyone notice any errors in this file? Particularly anything that would make the install routine fail with this error:

Notice how my build.prop file has these lines:

# ro.build.product is obsolete; use ro.product.device

ro.build.product=Indigo​

The first line is a comment ("# ro.build.product is obsolete; use ro.product.device"), but the line immediately after uses ro.build.product anyway ("ro.build.product=Indigo"). WTF?

Also notice:

# Do not try to parse ro.build.description or .fingerprint

ro.build.description=ventana-user 3.1 ThinkPadTablet_A310_02 0039_0089_US release-keys

ro.build.fingerprint=Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:3.1/ThinkPadTablet_A310_02/0039_0089_US:user/release-keys​

Is my build.prop file screwed up? Is that why my update is failing?

# begin build properties
# autogenerated by buildinfo.sh
ro.build.id=ThinkPadTablet_A310_02
ro.build.display.id=ThinkPadTablet_A310_02_0039_0089_US
ro.build.version.incremental=0039_0089_US
ro.build.version.sdk=12
ro.build.version.codename=REL
ro.build.version.release=3.1
ro.build.date=Tue Feb 14 18:39:35 CST 2012
ro.build.date.utc=1329215975
ro.build.type=user
ro.build.user=build
ro.build.host=build-desktop
ro.build.tags=release-keys
ro.product.model=ThinkPad Tablet
ro.product.brand=Lenovo
ro.product.name=ThinkPadTablet
ro.product.device=Indigo
ro.product.board=ventana
ro.product.cpu.abi=armeabi-v7a
ro.product.cpu.abi2=armeabi
ro.product.manufacturer=Lenovo
ro.product.locale.language=en
ro.product.locale.region=US
ro.wifi.channels=
ro.board.platform=tegra
# ro.build.product is obsolete; use ro.product.device
ro.build.product=Indigo
# Do not try to parse ro.build.description or .fingerprint
ro.build.description=ventana-user 3.1 ThinkPadTablet_A310_02 0039_0089_US release-keys
ro.build.fingerprint=Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:3.1/ThinkPadTablet_A310_02/0039_0089_US:user/release-keys
ro.build.characteristics=tablet
ro.product.input.defaultpkg=com.nuance.flext9_OEM.input
# end build properties
ro.opengles.version = 131072
wifi.interface=wlan0
service.mtp.defult_lock=true
keyguard.no_require_sim=1

#
# ADDITIONAL_BUILD_PROPERTIES
#
tf.enable=y
ro.setupwizard.mode=DISABLED
ro.com.google.gmsversion=3.1_r2
ro.config.notification_sound=OnTheHunt.ogg
ro.config.alarm_alert=Alarm_Classic.ogg
ro.com.google.clientidbase=android-lenovo
dalvik.vm.heapstartsize=5m
dalvik.vm.heapgrowthlimit=48m
dalvik.vm.heapsize=256m
dalvik.vm.dexopt-flags=m=y
net.bt.name=Android
dalvik.vm.stack-trace-file=/data/anr/traces.txt
[Thinkpad Tablet General] SoonerLater:
Tried Update.Zip (OTA) instead of Download From Lenovo -- Diff Failure

Ok... I've been trying to install A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip which I had downloaded from Lenovo's ThinkPad Tablet download site. I decided just for grins, to try installing update.zip which is what is placed in your /cache/ on your TpT when you attempt a System Update from within the TpT itself. After instructing my TpT to "check for system updates" and letting it fully download, then choosing "install later..." after which I copied update.zip and update.xml to the root of my (external) SD Card. After that, I rebooted into Recovery (by now, CMW 5.5.0.4 -- I installed it this afternoon in frustration) and this time to tried to install the Update.zip instead of the A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip that I'd downloaded this morning from Lenovo.

Anyway... this failed too, but with a different error:

Assert failed: getprop("ro.product.device") == "Indigo" || get prop("ro.build.product") == "Indigo"

If you read the previous post, there's a statement in Build.Prop that, "ro.build.product is obsolete; use ro.product.device." I wonder if this has anything to do with the error that is stopping my install.
[Thinkpad Tablet General] mandrsn1:
It will install if you comment out the build.prop check. You may have just done that incorrectly. There is an issue with editing the file in wordpad on windows. Use a different text editor.

There likely isn't an issue with your build.prop. The issue comes from CWR, it spoofs a different device (I think Asus Transformer) to install CWR, hence when in CWR the device report incorrect build.prop info.
[Thinkpad Tablet General] SoonerLater:
I first tried this (and tried it for hours)

without

CWM installed, but got that error. I tried installing from the menu (Check for System Updates) and from the SD Card (using both [1] the update.zip that the "check for updates" method puts in your cache, by copying it to the root the external SD Card, and [2] the ThinkPadTablet_A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip that you can download from http://download.lenovo.com/slates/think/tablet1. I ran these from the SD Card using the default/factory Recovery that you get to through boot (power + volume up until boot starts, then volume up until you see the Recovery message).

Out of frustration, I

installed CWM

after several hours, thinking that maybe it would help. As you might guess, it did not. I would mention, however, that there are some posts out there where a user successfully updated to ICS using CWM (although his CWM was unusable after the ICS install, I assume). This resulted in the same errors.

I guess that my next step is to modify the

updater.script

found inside /META-INF/com/google/android/ which is found inside the update.zip or other zip you're trying to install (e.g. ThinkPadTablet_A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip). I believe that I can modify the

updater.script

to comment out the lines that are failing.

assert(file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:3.1/ThinkPadTablet_A310_02/0039_0089_ROW:user/release-keys" ||

file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0069_0121_ROW:user/release-keys");

Unfortunately, after you modify the updater.script, you can't just shove it back into update.zip (or whatever). You have to generate a new zip using the method described in this post of this thread. Even worse, the instructions on how to generate a new zip install are above my head.

If I don't care about preserving

anything

on this TpT, isn't there a simple way to nuke this back to the way that it shipped from the factory and then update to ICS from there? I've owned dozens or hundreds of computers, but installing a new OS on this device is more complicated and more frustrating than all of the rest combined.
[Thinkpad Tablet General] SoonerLater:
If I try to install update.zip from the root of the SD Card using CWM Recovery, I get this error:

Assert failed: getprop("ro.product.device") == "Indigo" || get prop("ro.build.product") == "Indigo"​

If try to install ThinkPadTablet_A400_03_0069_0130_US.zip) from teh SD Card using CWM Recovery, I get this error:

assert failed: file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0065_0128_US:user/release-keys" || file_getprop("/system/build.prop", "ro.build.fingerprint") == "Lenovo/ThinkPadTablet/Indigo:4.0.3/ThinkPadTablet_A400_03/0069_0130_US:user/release-keys"​

Having read the updater.script in both of these ZIPs, I know that the install is tripping at nearly the very first line. I've seen other threads where people are missing certain APKs / ODEXs, such as Busybox and WPA_Supplicant to name a few. Those people got around the problem by replacing those apps from previous (usually 0089 or 0086) versions. A few go around the problem by editing the updater.script, then rebuilt their zip, re-signing it, and sprinkling it with magic fairy dust per

http://fokke.org/site/content/howto-create-android-updatezip-package. I wish my situation were merely about replacing some APKs.

Is rebuilding updater.script my only hope? If so, could someone talk me through the lines to remove or comment out and how to re-sign the zip, please?

Tell me, Lenovo, why do you have to make this so difficult? I could install a new OS on 1000 PCs with less effort and frustration.
[Thinkpad Tablet General] eldata:
Shouldn't you be doing this update first;

ThinkPadTablet_A310_03_0069_01..>
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] smartedpanda:
I am heavily considering it for design, Jelly Bean, and the price! $350 New. I'm searching through the forums, and it seems like mixed reviews, but T989 is favored by an edge.

Any opinions?
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] Rob4828:
They are both great phones. It comes down to your preference. Gnex has no SD which is why I prefer the t989
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] bikrame:
No sd card. 5 mp camera hold me on.

We going to get JB anyway .
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] smartedpanda:
Yeah, the only reason I'm debating is money, and the microSD. Design I love, and ICS sucks right now for me. The MP doesn't really matter to me, I prefer quality over size, that's just my preference, the accessories side they're about even too.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] FSUSeminole:
+1 same here. I have a 32GB SD with a ton of music on it.... can't live without it.

---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:57 PM ----------

I'd get a GS3 before I got a GN. Soon they'll have some great ROMs for it (like AOKP) and it'll be just as bleeding edge android wise as the GN... with better hardware and an SD slot.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] magiconthetire:
Ive had both! Obviously the Galaxy Nexus is the "better" choice due to the development. But as others have said, the lack of expandable memory and the fact the GSM 32gb never dropped is a huge letdown. I perfer using the S2 day to day though
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] smartedpanda:
I just realized there's no WiFi feature also, wow, guess I'm sticking to my T-989, since reception sucks in my house.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] new ion?:
assuming you mean wifi calling...

the GN has wifi.

again....

anything that isn't hacked to crap by tmo DOESN'T HAVE WIFI CALLING (not directed at you... directed at everyone that keeps asking)

as the GN is a Nexus phone... it's not hacked to crap.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] ragnarok12:
I made the switch. I love my Gnex but the t989 is still great.

I love custom roms and up to date software so I switched over. Gnex is on track to be the first to receive Jellybean, sometime in the next week or two, along with source.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] }{Alienz}{:
Just bought a Galaxy Nexus last week for my dad.

Running Jelly Bean on it.

I do have to say Jelly Bean is amazing but it's not the leap that was Gingerbread to Ice Cream. It feels JUST like Ice Cream but faster. The new Google Now and a few other features are great though.

Having said that. The nexus is an awesome phone. But I do think the T989 is the better overall phone. Having a microSD card is huge. The Nexus only has ~11GB open to the user. The SGS2 also has a better camera. It's not just about megapixels either. I tested the two side by side. The Galaxy Nexus camera is the same as that on the Samsung Vibrant (Galaxy S1). The S2 camera blows it away.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] Android Revolution:
That's because ICS was a complete overhaul of the OS. Hence, it is 4.x, not 2.x.

Jelly Bean is an incremental update, not an overhaul. It is akin to the Froyo to Gingerbread update.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] PersonZ:
I figure I shall hold on to the T989 regardless of weather or not it gets Jelly Bean. My main plan is to wait for the next Nexus Line of phones.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] Rob4828:
+1
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] galaxy_2012:
I just sold my phone for 300 on craigslist. Im thinking of buying a gnexus but i was wondering if anyone knows how much it is on google play with taxes and shipping?
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] byt3b0mb:
its $367 with taxes and shipping approximately. and to speak to the topic of the thread, bought the nexus - love it. no SD slot is not a deal breaker, also, the 5mp camera on the gnex takes better pics than the 8mp on the t989 also, the camera on gnex has zero shutter lag whatsoever and Jellybean is fast and awesome.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] Dimatchka:
When is the next Nexus phone scheduled to be released?
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] witor19:
Id like to know this too!
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] TheSeanTeam:
November. I think I read the 5th... 11-5 is the birthday of the g1
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-T989] droid75:
I'm sticking to the T989 for now due to financial issues and the fact that it has support for external SD. But I'm never buying a non-Nexus android phone again. Come November, I'm getting me the new Nexus that's rumored to be released.