yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] redpoint73:
I think you are making the discussion more confusing than it needs be. Versions due to technology are a separate (although related) topic to naming/branding. Yes, different hardware is required for different network types, but naming does not necessarily have to change with it. Carriers mainly want to have different name branding to differentiate themselves from other carriers, but then that hurts the manufacturer's branding.

Obvious cases in point, Galaxy S3 is on every one of the "Big 4" carriers, and so is the iPhone (with the sole exception of T-Mobile not carrying it), regardless of the fact that they are CDMA vs. GSM. Now both of those phones have much better branding, due at least partially to the more unified product name. The vast majority of the public have no idea what CDMA or GSM even means, and they don't care. They know they want an iPhone, or a Galaxy S3. They know what those phones are. If you ask people what phone HTC makes, most people can't even answer that question.

Also, HTC themselves have in the past made CDMA and GSM variants of their phones, and call them the same name. The Touch Pro 2 was carried on T-Mobile, Verizon, and Sprint. Name was the same for all the versions.

You don't understand exclusivity (or again blurring the line between hardware and branding). For one thing, its country specific. The One X is not offered by any other US carriers. The DNA and EVO 4G LTE are not offered anywhere else. Variants of them are, with different names, therefore still meaning there are exclusive.

---------- Post added at 11:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 AM ----------

While the EVO may not be exactly the same as the One X, its really not much different either. I think Sprint mainly forced this variant, because they wanted to differentiate themselves from AT&T and the "One" series.

With the DNA, I was more referring to the fact that its the same phone as the J Butterfly (not that its the same as the One X, which of course its not). And both those names are departures from the "One" philosophy. Also, the upcoming M4 doesn't look to be much different from the DNA, and itself representing a possible abandonment of the "One" scheme.

---------- Post added at 11:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:32 AM ----------

I see what you are getting at here. But at least from what I've witnessed, Samsung has made their branding work. On a bunch of occasions, I've heard people talk about the Galaxy S3 (and the S2 before it). How good a phone it is, how they want it, etc. Even though the naming convention seems contrived, there is still buzz about the Samsung phones. Something that HTC has tried to duplicate, but failed.

If people aren't talking about the phone, they aren't buying it. And that is one of the reasons why HTC is hurting.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] =JKT=:
The two questions I hear most from non-smartphone-nerds is "what kind of phone is that" and "is that a galaxy?"

I've also heard "it's a galaxy phone, so its a good phone" from some Samsung users.

So obviously their marketing is working, even if it creates some really annoying people.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] NJGSII:
I have a fear that the Galaxy people are going to become exactly like the iPhone crowd in terms of obnoxiousness and sheepness.

Sucks for HTC in a way as having used both phones extensively, I feel that our phone is superior save for not having an sd card slot. If the opposite were the case, I wouldn't be here right now. The power of marketing.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] twistedddx:
For what it is worth, evleaks and Football have said that the new flagship M7 might be named HTC One. Which also fits in line with the HTC Chinese New Years party where they chanted HTC One while the CEO held his M7/One.

I believe HTC is keen to continue using "One" branding for significant GSM phones.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Good morning everybody.

This has been discussed as a side item in a few topics, but I wanted to make this topic to get a definitive answer on the issue that people could refer to.

For those that do not know, the RAZR M has a root checker in the recovery menu. The values it can report are as follows (test in parenthesis are descriptive and not reported on the device) :

qe 0/0 (never rooted)

qe 1/1 (currently rooted)

qe 0/1 (not currently rooted, but has been rooted in the past)

It is that last report that is most concerning: even once root is removed Verizon/Motorola can still see that the device has been rooted at some time. A factory reset does not reset the checker to 0/0, but there are some reports that using a flashing file with RSDLite and restoring the phone will (in case you need to send in the phone for warranty work).

Is anyone able to personally verify that restoring by flashing will actually revert the check to 0/0? I know that personally, having just gotten my RAZR M, I'd like to keep the option of a warranty on the table.

Thank you to anyone who can help :)

EDIT: There have been a few mentions on other sites that restoring to 4.0.4 and then taking the OTA update to 4.1.1 will revert the root checker to 'qe 0/0' but I cannot get any verification on here as of yet. I will update this post once someone can confirm.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] cellzealot:
The term SBF is a complete misnomer and refers to a legacy firmware format for older devices.

We have XML.zip archives of fast boot images now for all dual core Motorola devices.

To answer your question regarding the qe status being reverted by flashing the full XML.zip with RSD Lite, the answer is no, that persists after flashing and should show 0/1 for a device that has been rooted but is not currently.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Thank you, I had not realized the method had changed. I just knew it was still RSDlite and a file like it had been for my Droid X.

Shame about the root check though. I would love to be able to backup/freeze my apps and such without foregoing the warranty.

Thank you for the information.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] skippid:
Re: Does SBFing reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

If you RSD to ICS and perform an OTA update to JB that it's defeated.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Re: Does SBFing reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

Woah, really? Any link to proof or discussion of this? This would make me very happy :)
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] skippid:
Re: Does SBFing reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

I've done it twice. I read it at Android Central. I'll look for the link later.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
So you are confirming a personal qe 0/0 when reverting to ICS and then updating to JB over OTA.

Fantastic. I look forward to the link as well.

:) You have made my night so far.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] skippid:
Re: Does SBFing reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

http://www.droidforums.net/forum/dr...y-default-reset-restore-data-after-ics-3.html

That's one reference. I did it twice, once unfortunately because my M's speaker kept going out. I bought my M at a 3rd party retailer and the first thing the sales associate did was check the qe values. My current one had 2:1 displayed out of the box, prior to any rooting. I hadn't rooted my phone, but did sync my apps from the playstore. I'm not sure what triggers that value.

---------- Post added at 08:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:00 AM ----------

I wonder if we could pinpoint the location of the program, and swap the file or folder with a stock, "safe" one, so once a phone is reset, it can't carry a log of root activity.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Strange, since 2/1 isn't even a value I am seeing on other sites. But even with 2/1, yours read 0/0 after a flash to ICS and then an OTA update to JB?

And sorry if it seems I am just beating a dead horse here, but I am hoping to test this myself sometime so I can help verify for others as well, but I don't want to try it unless I am 99% sure it will work.

Anyone else?
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Re: Does Flashing reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

I think its in the locked boot loader, but I could be wrong.

Sent from my Droid RAZR M using the XDA Developers app.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sniperkill:
Re: Does Flashing to ICS then OTA to JB reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

It does NOT reset the root checker. I used RSDlite to take me back to ICS, then I let my phone update itself to JB. I then factory reset my phone, then I checked my root checker and it was still 0/1
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Coronado is dead:
Re: Does Flashing to ICS then OTA to JB reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

Thank you for taking the time to confirm that. Very disappointing.

Sent from my Droid RAZR M using the XDA Developers app.
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sniperkill:
Re: Does Flashing to ICS then OTA to JB reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

No problem. Thanks. I tried this method just to see if it would reset the root checker. Epic fail :mad:
[Droid RAZR M Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] skippid:
Re: Does Flashing to ICS then OTA to JB reset the recovery root checker to "0/0'?

It worked on my M. But mine had weird values from the start, before I rooted it. I had to RSD to get rid of safestrap. I haven't bothered with this one yet. (The replacement) I have read posts on other websites that the checker wasn't as accurate as Moto would have liked. I would like an answer to what the 2/1 value means. But we won't know till the boot loader is unlocked. Is there a root checker on the developer edition?
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
Does anyone know the difference between beanstalk and CM 10.1's jelly bean battery life?? Because i just got beanstalk yesterday and it's been draining my battery pretty quick so I'm thinking about switching back to CM 10.1 to see if there are any differences in the battery life..:confused::confused::confused:
[Samsung Infuse 4G] zpzp96:
I don't think there are any differences to be honest.

Beanstalk is based on CM10.1 with some extra features.

But I still recommend to try as many as different ROMs possible because it might be ROM but it also could be your old battery.

My battery is new and it is still bad. So I can see if it's older and worn out battery, must be really bad.

By the way, ice cream sandwich and jellybean have worse battery life than gingerbread.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] Goneeuro:
I get better battery life on JB than I ever got on GB. And I'm still on my original battery.

I replied to your other post though with an app that could help. And by the way. After daily driving both cm10.1 and beanstalk, the battery life difference is not noticeable.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] ashishrai90:
Unofficial CM10.1

How many hours of battery life are you getting on current Unofficial CM10.1 ? I flashed it last night and charged it to 100% and it has drained to 18% in 14hrs.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
Thats insane :eek: Cause mines was loosing 1% every min
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TJj33p3rz:
I don't notice any difference in battery life with any ROM.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] elbscorp:
First couple of days on any new ROM or update always has worse battery life. ROM has to settle in
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
how long did it take for yours to settle in
[Samsung Infuse 4G] elbscorp:
I flashed last update Wed.night. Battery at 100% before flash,now on third battery cycle. This is about where battery life will level off till next update.Even on heavy use days it last till get home from work no problem,I plug in before bed. I undervolt,but allow 3 emails & facebook to have push notifications,using google now,and use a navigation app some.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
so what ROM are you using? Cause i just saw that bean stalk just got an update yesterday
[Samsung Infuse 4G] elbscorp:
BeanStalk,I saw the update right after posted last night. Stayed up late and flashed it
[Samsung Infuse 4G] magnetboard:
I'll have a look at beanstalk if Carbon has the same battery life as PA. I can't get 8 hours out of it
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
let me know if you notice a difference in the 2 roms :D
[Samsung Infuse 4G] magnetboard:
I left Carbon because of the sizing differences between 260 and 190 DPI, and the home key did not work, although the battery seemed amazing even though it was just after a flash. I didn't have much of a chance to test as I had 38% battery. Ill try Beanstalk now, right after I clear some space
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
I'm on bean stalk right now and i'm gonna do what everyone is telling to do and thats let the rom settle in the phone for a few days and see if anything changes
[Samsung Infuse 4G] magnetboard:
Well let me know when it settles. Anything is better than PA at this point
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
Well Beanstalk is not dying as quick as Slim Bean and CM 10 cause i left it on charge all night while listening to music and it stayed at 100% for atleast 10 mins or longer but i'm gonna continue to do that till thursday
[Samsung Infuse 4G] hokey777:
I get better battery when I turn off Google Location Access.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] ashishrai90:
Which ROM is better in battery life CM10.1 or Beanstalk ? I have been using 10.1 from past 1 week but battery life is terrible.On 100% full charge i got around 18hrs wid limited internet access and phone calls nd brightness set to minimum.
[Samsung Infuse 4G] TokyoLee:
Right now i'm using beanstalk and i used this app that disables the mediaserver so my battery on it is not so bad but not so good.. Everyone using Carbon is saying their battery is great so try Carbon at the development page :good:
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Attention users!

Around our community, I have been seeing a lot of people having problems with the carrier / Chameleon error from switching between LJ1 / LJC / LK8 / MA5 roms.

This error happens when you boot your phone.

It starts the Hands Free Activation, and then the Chameleon Force Close happens.

With this flashable .zip, that will happen NO MORE!

This is an LJC Carrier Restore.

We have this awesome fix made by Garwynn (Tested by -EVil KoNCEPTz-) and it works like a charm.

Just flash this .zip file in TWRP or CWM and BOOM, Chameleon errors gone!

http://www.mediafire.com/?87k042cy13hb1yc

If you want more information on the fix or just want to look at the original posts, here are the original threads provided by Garwynn:

Original thread that (Garwynn) somewhat hijacked - sorry:

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2062499

Start around Post #60.

First fix post - moves both to LK8 version:

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=36115598&postcount=67

Second fix post - moves both back to LJC version:

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=36181746&postcount=103

All credit for this fix goes to Garwynn and his tester -EVil kONCEPTz- !

Thank you guys so much, Chameleon error was becoming a nuisance.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] yellowman82:
Isn't there a thread for this already?
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] Patch7:
Yes
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Yes there is, but I wanted to make an updated one because i'm seeing dozens of people complaining about chameleon errors.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] CZuber:
God Send. Thanks
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] neudof:
So did you create this fix?

You might want to read the rules..

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1982824

[Warning] MUST READ 1st
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
All credit goes to Garwynn for this fix, permission was given.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] garwynn:
I'm giving my blessing to this post as I hijacked another's thread for it.

Besides, my original posts attached them as ZIPs into the thread.

OP,

Please make sure to repost both ZIPs from the original thread if you're going to post.

Make sure they know which carrier build they will flash depending on ZIP.

Other than that you're good in my eyes.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Okay thanks, will update OP now.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] kingdazy:
EDITED out of respect for EK and G.

Nice of Garwynn to give his approval.

Thanks Garwynn and Evil K for that fix.

Thanks OP for the thread to direct ppl to with the issue.

Sent from my calculator watch.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] -EViL-KoNCEPTz-:
Yea garwynn and I both gave the OK. I was intending to start a thread for it and, well you know, life got in the way and I forgot about it.

I like to break stuff! :D
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
As you probably know, I'm still fairly new to xda and developing.

What happened before was dumb on my part for not knowing rules and such, and users took it out of proportion seeing as things like that don't happen much here.

I've proceeded to apologize to the developer and he accepted my apology.

You have my word, whatever I post here on out with be official and regulated.

As I stated before, still pretty new to the developing community.

I'm currently working on some projects of my own as a starter. (Mods, rom, etc.)

My reason behind starting a new thread for this topic is because I've seen numerous users having problems with the chameleon error, so I took the initiative to ask if I could post this purely to help and inform other users.

What happened before was a 1 time thing.

I still expect respect as I give it.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] KEYofR:
When I first installed MA5 I got Chameleon stopped errors 4 or so times while the phone was first booting up, but as far as I can tell it didn't hurt anything.

On subsequent reboots and a couple of nandroid restores back to my old rom then back to the new one, it never happened again, and my phone seems to be fully working, including calls and txt.

So it was a very transient error that fixed itself just by rebooting or maybe even just by waiting.

Given that, do we know that a more invasive fix is even really necessary? Does it not clear after a reboot for some people? What does it break?

Also a description of what this fix does would be nice. People should not flash things without some idea of what it will actually do and how it will do it.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] garwynn:
The error

only applies if you revert to LJC/LJ1 after going to LK8/MA5.

If you don't do this, you won't see it and you can move along without concern :)

For those going back you will have an issue as LJ1/LJC use an earlier SQLite DB version in the carrier partition than previous versions. Chameleon.apk in those earlier builds doesn't know how to handle it and so it crashes.

There are two solutions to this: Move chameleon to the new version to match the new DB version (which is Fix #1) or revert the carrier partition - which can be flashed by Odin but Sammy doesn't make an image for some reason - to LJC. (Fix #2)

One person reported that deleting the partition contents also forced a rebuild, but I'm personally not a fan of that option. No guarantee without seeing for myself that it rebuilds properly.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] 2k10MBC300SPT:
Great Post Regardless...Somehow I missed the Orig post anyway..LOL Thatnks to Gar and all who was involved...
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] KEYofR:
Thank you for the excellent summary!

---------- Post added at 06:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:09 PM ----------

It also means my chameleon errors were probably not from installing ma5 but from when I temporarily reverted to a nandroid just to export txts and call logs.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Yes, there has been a post that has the actual coding in it for the fix so devs can implement it into the roms themselves.

Im sure it'll pick up soon and there wont need to be a flashable .zip.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] -EViL-KoNCEPTz-:
Hey, just be glad garwynn and I were able to find that damn database error. I had poked around for a few weeks trying to figure it out then we dumped some logs from my phone during multiple errors and then again after updating chameleon and found the mismatched sqlite versions which were wreaking havoc on the chameleon apk and HFA. Basically every reboot the phone thought it was deactivated cuz it couldn't verify auth data in the carrier db's. Thanks for getting the thread up finally

PS. Next time someone posts something of mine with credit in the OP, trying PMing me before you rip the poster apart or just don't even bother saying anything at all. I don't GAF about credit or thanks, I do what I do for myself and just share because theres no point in hoarding my work. If I have a problem with someone posting my work I'll deal with it. I don't need people berating others for posting my work on my behalf. Honestly I'd be more pissed at others reactions than the person who posted my work. Thanks for your cooperation, now please edit all the unnecessary bashing of the OP and apologize for jumping all over them when it wasn't your place to try and get involved with something that was privately dealt with between the proper parties prior to being posted here. The OP did me a favor by posting this for us since I've been busy and hadn't gotten around to it, and this directly benefits everyone on this forum. Anyone who doesn't edit and apologize will be noted, and I will no longer help you or click your thanks button out of sheer principle. Thanks for your cooperation. :cool::thumbup:

I like to break stuff! :D
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
:thumbup:
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] 2k10MBC300SPT:
AM not the bashing type anyways..Great point though EvilK:good:
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] K.0.0.L.:
Chameleon has been fix long time ago by the DEV you claim they gave you permission.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
I suggest you read the thread bud.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] -EViL-KoNCEPTz-:
Ummm both me and garwynn gave permission but I guess you'd know that if you had any reading comprehension skills :rolleyes:

I like to break stuff! :D
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] mackentosh:
Truuuuuu!
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] a454nova:
I like this thread... Nice work guys.

.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Before edit: *and OP

Edit: Oops, didn't see you thanked me.

I guess its a start.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] kingdazy:
if you're implying what i think you're implying, no.

I used exactly the words I intended, to convey the meaning i intended.

don't put words in my mouth. i'm taking this to PM.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] devynbf:
Someone should at least clean this thread.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] garwynn:
Guys, please take it to PM. We don't need fighting in the threads.

If it keeps up I

will

flag it and ask Jay to lock it down.

Sorry, while I'm all for the work being shared let's try to keep it on point.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] 2k10MBC300SPT:
Thread beef are so Lame:( It's VERY sad to see how a Keyboard equates to "Tough Guys"..LOL
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] -EViL-KoNCEPTz-:
Yes the whole point of my novel length post up there was to put this thread back on track. OP has permission to maintain this thread. They PMd garwynn and I prior to creating it, so its A-OK. I'm not familiar with the OPs prior oopsy that has everyone's knickers in a twist but that's neither here nor there, we all make mistakes from time to time, hell I got banned for a week less than a month after I registered. So like I said if you have an issue take it to PM. PM me, PM garwynn, PM the OP but keep it out of this thread please and thank you. Next person who makes off topic backhanded comments towards the OP or anyone else in this thread will be reported and I will ask the mod to clean the thread but not completely close it. If this thread gets closed I will not allow another one to be made until this childishness stops. :thumbup:

I like to break stuff! :D
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note II] MiguelHogue:
:) Just a place holder if I ever need this

-TeaM VeNuM Like A Boss

-Galaxy Note II Edition