yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Atrix 4G Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ccrows:
I recently replaced my battery with the same one that came with the phone. Found a relatively cheap OEM on eBay, and I charge it every day (sometimes twice on days with really heavy usage).

IDK the maximum charges, but you can kinda tell when a battery isn't as strong as it once was when it came with the phone.

Then again this is EXACTLY why I want removable batteries on my cell phones and absolutely HATE integrated battery cell phones... (IDC how "cool" the phone looks)
[Atrix 4G Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] jodahall:
I have both of those and the maximum charge i get on the bh6x is 4200 and the bh5x is 4174

Hope that helps
[Atrix 4G Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] joelorona:
Thanks. i found out that both charges uo to 4200 but everything depends on the power per hour they can deliver :)

Thankyou
[Galaxy Ace S5830 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] jerkysh:
Hi there, i got my hands on a Galaxy Ace, and got in a problem...

rooted it, installed CWM 3, wanted to update to CWM 5, and flashed this ''recovery_clockwork_5.0.2.6_galaxyace_fix'', after rebooted to recovery and here the problems start... it doesn't pass the Samsung logo, just stays there, i can acces Ram dump and download mode, but odin doesnt seem to detect it in dl mode.. what can i do now?

btw, its on froyo
[Galaxy Ace S5830 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] TheBlackWolf:
CWM is optimized for GB maybe... If u are able to go in download mode just upgrade to GB via odin and then install CWM 5 zip

Install Samsung drivers.... Then odin will detect ur device
[Sony Tablet S] hivonzooo:
Can somebody post a link to the .apk file? I wanna test it on Sony Tablet S and other devices.
[Sony Tablet S] jumper62:
What apk? Do you mean the system dump?
[Sony Tablet S] hivonzooo:
No, i want application from Play Market. Google won't allow me to dowload this to my Sony Tablet S, only Xperia.
[Sony Tablet S] mehran_o0o:
I want it too. My xperia ion rooted with ics, but google says its not compatible. So if anyone give me a libk to apk it would b awesome

Sent from my LT28h
[Sony Tablet S] Till-Kruspe:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/...SwxLDEsImNvbS5zb255bW9iaWxlLnhwZXJpYWxpbmsiXQ..
[Sony Tablet S] stifilz:
Which app?? Have you used AIO to install modded Play Store, so you can install any app??
[Sony Tablet S] mehran_o0o:
I xan poat the app for tablet but i need the app for phone... Apparently xperia ion is not compatible but i still wanna mess with it

sent from xperia ion att rooted with ics
[Sony Tablet S] wolf_flow:
Xperia link

Here,

client is for tablet. it works!

Sorry for my bad English
[Sony Tablet S] zaynal:
Thanks for sharing. It works with my Sony Xperia S and Sony Tablet S. This app actually use Xperia smartphones wifi tethering feature. Bluetooth connection is just to active the feature whenever both devices detected.
[Sony Tablet S] SirRobin78:
Is there a chance to use tethering over bluetooth with this app?

Gesendet von meinem SGPT12 mit Tapatalk 2
[Sony Tablet S] mehran_o0o:
Thanks... I needed the server... My tablet has the client, i can mirror mine.. If needed let me know

sent from xperia ion att rooted with ics
[Sony Tablet S] vinurohitraj:
Thanjs dude.. it works properly.... :)
[Sony Tablet S] Nicamarcel1:
Does someone has the apk for the phone?
[Sony Tablet S] xperia_pro:
Root and update it, the application is preinstaled in r5 update
[Sony Tablet S] eric1214:
I don't know how to use, my phone and tablet is linking .

Sent from Xperia S - XTX7.0
[Sony Tablet S] Tibisor:
Hello! It seems that the client works great with my tablet z, but the older Xperia neo refuse to comply. When I try to install phone app, it says 'application not instaled'. Any help will be much appreciated!
[Sony Tablet S] Greek_Wonder:
Xperia Z1S from T-Mobile

I downloaded client on my phone and already had it on tablet but it still will not connect? do you have any suggestions?
[Sony Tablet S] luoisd:
xperia link not working on nexus 7 ( 2013)

This is a dump question, but i think u may help me out. I had tried the SomcXperiaLinkClient.apk for my Nexus 7 (2013). First time when it tetering with my phone ( xperia sp c5302), that was awesome. After that, the next time it kept drop connection each 10 minute. When i check in app info in both devices, the xperia link version 1.0.A.0.9 ( Nexus 7 2013 ), and in my phone is 2.3.A.0.4. I guess the difference version may cause this drop when they tetering via bluetooth. Ah ! when i tetering them by NFC, the xperia link in my Nexus will pop up and ask me to install the update version. Can u help me to solve this problem ??. Thankss so much ( my english is not good, so sorry guys )
[Sony Tablet S] Achmad Arif:
Me too
[Galaxy Ace S5830 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] isafarady:
+1
[Galaxy Ace S5830 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Prawesome:
You are wrong...

Insert witty sentence here

---------- Post added at 06:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:38 PM ----------

@OP,flash a GB firmware with Odin after installing drivers with Kies.

Insert witty sentence here
[Galaxy Ace S5830 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] TheBlackWolf:
CWM 5 isn't compatible with froyo??? :rolleyes:
[HTC One S] ady_uaic:
Hi all,

Can someone help me to revert back to stock rom? I've tried to install Energy ROM but I got an error, and after that my device doesn't boot anymore (probably because I've wiped everything before installing). So, how can I go back to a stock rom please???
[HTC One S] CHEVYbarracuda1:
First of all u should of backed up everything.. find original stock rom and go into download mode and revetsr it
[HTC One S] ady_uaic:
can you please help me by finding the stock rom (please)? Also, how's the download mode? I know how to go to fastboot by pressing vol down and power.

L.E. I found this link: http://www.filefactory.com/f/cf061f69b5bf7878/ but first of all I cannot download nothing from there, and second I don't know which one should I pick (I have S4 device).

L.E.2: Is it ok to use one of this? http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1543588&page=57

Also, what I get when I'm in fastboot is:

VLE PVT SHIP S-ON RL

HBOOT-1.06.0000

RADIO-0.15.31501S.19

OpenDSP-v21.1.0.32.0314

eMMC-boot

Well, I've managed to make it worked, thx @CHEVYbarracuda1!
[HTC One S] Ivancp:
If you wiped all, download the 2.31 ruu in your computer but first install stock recovery and close bootloader (fastboot oem lock comand) and install the ruu from pc i make that 2 times and works for me, like make a clean installation :D
[HTC One S] Nogad:
Try to avoid running the latest RUU for the time being until you have tried other methods, once you run the latest RUU it will update your hboot version to 1.14 and it will cause a lot of problems for you when you want to upgrade your radio rom. Make sure youo have flashed the boot.img after you flash the rom otherwise it will cause your phone to hang on the load screen.

Here is a link to the appropraite RUU files http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1543588. However i recommend you try a fresh install of Energy Rom with a full wipe (cache/dalvik/system/factory reset) and flash boot.img after to see if it fixes your problem because if you run RUU and update hboot there is no going back.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] scmlee:
Hi,

Firstly, this is not to start any debate about which aspect ratio is better, but is more a question for those who own (or have used) the first generation Galaxy Note.

I'm really looking forward to getting the Note II (upgrade from my current i9000) and my first concern upon hearing of the new aspect ratio (16:9) is how well it works well with the S-Pen for writing. Especially since writing in English (and many others) is from left-to-right, and not vertical. So reducing the width of the device means even less space to write.

So for note users, from your experience with the 16:10 screen, do you think the new 16:9 screen is a concern for writing with the S-Pen?

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated :D
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Jcossack88:
I could be wrong, but I believe they increased the size of the screen and reduced the size of the bezel, so it would be roughly the same size.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] deliriousbb:
I have the Note (16:10) @ 5.3" and also the GS3 (16:9) @ 4.8". The Note's screen is substantially larger in width and height. Viewing web pages and reading, the Note is definitely easier. But while viewing movies or video clips, the 16:10 on the Note actually isn't that much bigger than the GS3. The "black bars" from the aspect ratio actually wastes the view space on the screen. So with a larger screen 5.55" on the Note 2 you will definitely have a better experience watching videos. And as for using the S pen to write with, you shouldn't worry about that at all. If you ever compared the dimensions between the Note and Note 2, the size is very negligible. My GS3 is my daily driver and I've handed the Note to my dad because the camera performance is much faster on the GS3. But once the Note 2 is out, I will be back on it.

Very minimal difference. The biggest changes are: Note 2 is narrower by close to 3mm, but taller by 4.25mm. I'll take the skinner taller chick any day ;)

Note vs Note 2 Dimension

NOTE 1: 146.85 (H) x 82.95 (W) x 9.65 mm (D), 178g

NOTE 2: 151.10 (H) x 80.50 (W) x 9.40 mm (D), 182.5g

Check out the specs:

NOTE Original

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxynote/note/spec.html?type=find

NOTE 2

http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxynote/note2/spec.html?type=find
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Asquared:
I have a similar concern, but it doesn't relate to viewing movies or video clips. My question is more around keyboard input for texting, emails, etc. My question is more around how much LESS WIDE is the screen of the Note II, versus that of the Note I. For my aging eyes, the wider the virtual keyboard in portrait mode, the better. So, I'm not at all concerned with the outer dimensions of the Note I and II -- I'm more interested in how much the usable screen's width decreases from the Note I to the Note II. Anybody got any info in this area? Thanks in advance for your replies.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sevans21:
Good comparison site for sizes of both displays

http://www.displaywars.com/5,5-inch-16x9-vs-5,3-inch-16x10

Portrait width is .1" narrower but .3" taller on the Note II. They also list diagonal sizes at the various aspect ratios.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] deliriousbb:
If you check the specs of the width, it is only 3mm wider, but yet the Note2 practically is all screen from bezel to bezel. You basically have an additional 6.28mm of diagonal screen space to work with. Again, I don't think you need to worry about the width and how it will effect your typing. It is negligible. 4.79 inches vs. 4.49 inches

Plus the latest keyboards from swype uses all of the width space and is very easy to type with even with the smaller GS3 screen.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Viper2005:
Because the screen is taller, the change in physical width of the screen is very small, around 2.5mm.

There is a loss of 80 pixels from the sides but the remaining pixels are larger than on the note 1 to make up for the loss of the 80.

So physically there is just almost the same amount of room for the pen to move as on the note 1. Also I expect the keyboard buttons to be the same size, just maybe the resolution of the text will be less.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] dhar8062:
Sorry to resurrect an old discussion, but just wanted to chip in!

I had the Note 1 for 11 months and Note 2 LTE for 3 weeks and of course I'm loving it!

Just to point out, the results from that displaywars website are "rotated". i.e. width should be height and vice versa

It shows that the Note 2 is 0.3 inches taller and 0.11 inches thinner.

I must say I notice the "loss" of width in screen real estate. Although the Note 2 feels better in the hand. It could just be I'm used to the original Note.

They say how films are better on the Note 2 because of the 16:9 ratio but in my experience most modern films are being presented in the 2.39:1 ratio so I still get the black bars on the top and bottom. EDIT: However, TV shows are in 16:9 so are full screen.

Just my two cents!
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] scottx .:
Been wondering about this myself. I have a note 1.

Would the square inch space / size of the screen be higher on the 1? I did read ½ of the thread. :)
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Souai:
sure most movies are 2.4:1, but you also need to factor in that it means that on the note 1, you lose even more rows of pixels compared to the note 2, so movies will still be better on the note 2 because the black bars will be narrower.

and i find my note 2 to be sharper than my note 1. even though its missing 80 rows of pixels, it ends up being sharper because it has a full subpixel matrix, which means that despite having 80 rows of pixels less, it still ends up with 30% more subpixels, which makes it better overall in my books.
[Galaxy Note II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] arthur.gamma:
all blurry

I have a problem my galaxy note 2, I think the loss of resolution to 1280x720 left the icons and letters all blurry, while the galaxy note 1 to define the icons and letters were much better. this is a hardware issue or software?
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] newuser134:
Is it an absolute certainty that flashing another carrier version of GS3's radio on an I535 will hard brick it? Over on the AT&T GS3 forum lots of people have tried flashing modified and stock T-Mobile (T999) radios on their I747, and some lose signal, some lose imei (and can restore it), but no one seems to hard brick their phone. I read here that the modem is on mmcblk0 so it is the first thing that boots on an msm8960, so if you get the wrong one, it won't let the bootloader boot, you lose bootloader, Odin mode and custom recovery, hence no way to restore any modems or backups, and therefore hard brick. Well, if the AT&T hardware is the exact same, why is it that no one there has hard bricked theirs by flashing T999 modems (which is for an even more different chip type, msm8260A)? Shouldn't our CPU/modem module chip be able to boot from firmware made for a similar (or identical) chipset? How does our chipset even "know" it's a Verizon version before it boots the firmware? Has anyone done this and not hard bricked their I535? Are there any devs that have access to jtag, that would be willing to try to flash a stock or modified I747 or T999 modem to see if it works, if they know they'll be able to recover from it if it doesn't?

I understand unplugging your phone from your pc while Odin is flashing a radio WILL brick it, since there won't be anything to boot from next time, but if you flash a different version radio for another carrier's GS3, shouldn't it at least boot into bootloader, even if you might lose signal or some functionality temporarily? What I don't understand is how AT&T GS3's can flash T-Mobile radios then return to their own radio or restore, but if we flash an AT&T (or any other GS3) radio on ours, it will hard brick. Is there an unknown major difference between our version and the other versions that I'm not aware of?
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] ECrispy:
What exactly are you trying to do by flashing the AT&T modem?
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] newuser134:
I believe this phone has the ability to run on wcdma 1900 AND 2100, but I think Verizon's modem firmware has locked the 1900 band to disable the use of high speed data (3G , HSPA+) on domestic gsm carriers, but left 2100 open so people can use their GS3's overseas to roam on foreign gsm/wcdma networks when they choose to roam. It has been confirmed that many foreign gsm carriers offer their H+ data on wcdma 2100, no domestic carrier does. The AT&T and t-mobile versions both get wcdma 1900, somehow ours doesn't. I can use AT&T roms, use service menu or netmonitor to get into band selection, all gsm bands work, including 1900 MHz, but wcdma only works on 1900, only on what Verizon would need for roaming. I believe flashing an AT&T modem would unlock that band (or at least help confirm whether the hardware radio for that band is there or not). I would try it, but too many good devs here have advised against it, I just want to figure out why it is not advisable.
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] con247:
People say not to try it because it hasn't been done before. If you want to flash it, give it a shot. It might work and make this phone even better. Or, it could brick. But it is impossible to know really until someone tries.
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] newuser134:
I'd hate to brick a perfectly good phone though, that's why I wanted to know I someone with jtag setup would be willing to do it on a "test" phone, like Adam was doing when trying to unlock the bootloader. If it does hard brick though, is it possible to recover with jtag? I don't want to do it if it will permanently hard brick. If jtag will recover it, or if someone with the equipment is willing to do it, that's why I wanted to do some research first and see if someone can make an educated guess.

The main thing I wanted to know from devs that read this, is if there is a reason they already know of why the Verizon 8960 chip would not boot off of the same firmware that the AT&T 8960 chip would? Is there any difference between them before loading the modem software, now that the bootloader is unlocked. This would be a question E.V.A or Adam, or any other knowledgable dev could answer.

Thanks for any more inputs.
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] mybook4:
I would also like to see this happen, but I don't have any JTAG equipment around.

Some thoughts:

1) We may need to change more than just the modem partition (mmcblk0p1) for 1900Mhz WCDMA to work. For example, the Synergy IMEI backup script saves backup copies of modemst1, modemst2, efs, fsg, and backup (mmcblk0p12, mmcblk0p13, mmcblk0p11, mmcblk0p21, and mmcblk0p20). Clearly some cellular related data is stored in these partitions. Flashing just the AT&T modem might not play nice with the related partitions (although I don't see this preventing a boot as these partitions are not part of the boot chain; more likely you would boot to no cellular connection).

2) The bootloader unlocking thread has a lot of info regarding the boot chain partition order. I could be wrong, but I believe the modem hands off control to executable code at a very specific location in the next partition in the boot chain (after loading the executable code to memory?). If this location differs between the AT&T and verizon phones, it could cause a hard brick (a jump to the wrong location). During the bootloader unlocking efforts, Ralekdev was able to reverse several verizon GS3 bootloader partition's machine code (1s and 0s) into arm assembly and then reverse them to C. Using his methodology, we may be able to see if the AT&T and VZW modems (mmcblk0p1) both jump to the same partition at the same location. This could help us to know if flashing the AT&T would definitely hard brick (this isn't the only way the AT&T modem could hard brick, but identifying one way could stop us before we did hard brick). This is tedious work and we would need a full dump from someone with an AT&T phone (mmcblk0p1,2,3,etc). The alternative would be someone with JTAG and brass ones just flashing the modem.

Also check this out http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?p=31705003

It is the full partition layout for a 32GB i535.

PS, I read through some of the bootloader unlocking thread again (brings back good memories). This post by Ralekdev

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?p=30082055 may explain why flashing an AT&T modem might hard brick. The AT&T modem would need to have the same hardware identifier and signature as the VZW one for the msm8960 to hand over execution to it. I'm gonna take a wild guess that it doesn't. I believe Verizon's locked bootloader may have just struck again.
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] newuser134:
That's why I love this forum, I know that together we can get this to work eventually, if the phone can do it.

Please check out the bounty thread I created for this, and feel free to add your donations if you are also one of those that really want this to happen.

Thread link
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] newuser134:
I thought after unlocking the bootloader, the new one doesn't check for anything or any signatures, just like I can now use AT&T kernels without any problems. If the modem is on mmcblk0p1, if the modem boots before anything else, the AT&T modem must also be booting before anything else, so it must also hand execution of code over to the bootloader at some point, that point may be different for the AT&T and VZW modems, but they both must hand over at some point, so I don't see why it wouldn't be the same. It would be really annoying if all the other carrier versions could exchange modems but not with the VZW version. That seems like something else the dev community would get mad enough about to solve again, just to prove to Verizon it can be done.
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] hypertek:
So if this is possible, think there is possibility of even better reception since it would be opened up? but does vzw even use those?
[Verizon Samsung Galaxy S III] mybook4:
You are probably right about the handover location being the same. It's probably an msm8960 thing, or at least samsung left it the same to make simultaneous development of all the US GS3 devices similar. All just speculation until we dive into the code or get someone to flash a modem.

Our current bootloader unlocking method was achieved by flashing an unsecure aboot partition (mmcblk0p5). In English (lol), there are several partitions in the boot chain leading to the kernel. The last one is aboot. The one after aboot is the kernel or the recovery partition (depending on whether you are or are not booting to recovery). Each partition in the boot chain checks to see that the next one has the correct signature before handing over execution to it. The unsecure aboot partition we now use to "unlock the bootloader" doesn't enforce (or just doesn't check) the signature of the kernel partition. This is why we are able to run custom kernels not signed by Samsung.

However, the bootloader partitions earlier than aboot still enforce signature checking before handing off execution. The first signature checks are done in hard coded msm8960 firmware. Although I'm not 100% certain of this, I believe the modem partition signature is checked in hardware by the msm8960 prior to execution (it would be a poor security system if it wasn't). So, unless we had Samsung's i535 private key used to sign the modem partition (something that would take more time than the current age of the universe to brute force on the world's fastest supercomputers), the AT&T modem would fail the signature check and the boot process would stop there. The AT&T and TMobile variants (and sprint for that matter) don't have Qualcomm's Secure Boot enabled, so their modem partition isn't subject to a signature check and enforcement.

On the bright side, if we were able to find a way to run a custom (non-i535) modem partition, we would have discovered a true bootloader unlock at one of the lowest levels.

Before the unsecure aboot partition was leaked and the i535 community rejoiced, there was some talk about seeing whether or not a QFuse for secure boot had been blown (permanently enabling secure boot). I don't think we ever found out with 100% certainty whether or not it was. If it isn't, we might still be able to disable secure boot, but it may involve a small hardware modification (a pull up or pull down resistor on an msm8960 GPIO pin. Annoying (and would take quite a while to locate the right one), but not too crazy to do with guts and a decent soldering iron. A software method is definitely preferred, but when you get that low level, you are sometimes dealing with read only segments.

PS, I think the bounty thread you started is a great idea! I'll be posting some of this info over there to get the ball rolling when I get the chance.