[MDA III, XDA III, PDA2k, 9090 General] HDuser:
Looks Like I have been forced to make a comment here.

The issue is whether the device has a camera built in and if this is the case how can XDA-Developers get it to work.

First, I personally think that this will be a conceptual discussion for based on my own experience taking the BA apart which is a pain, I don’t think that many or even anybody is going to spend the time drilling a hole in the their BA in order to get a ****ty VGA camera to work. However as I don’t have that problem it is really not fair to make that statement.

So let’s brake this done into a few logical steps where I will try to add what I have learnt over the last 4 months.

1)	Hardware

We have yet to see a picture of the back plate of an opened BA with camera and a SX66 without, so visually at least we don’t know what we are talking about.

For the fun of it let us say that there is camera inside.

That its been covered over with a different back casing in order to open up the market of the BA to Business users that don’t want to have (due to security) a phone with a built in camera and/or also don’t want to spend the extra money.

This I feel is a valid point and HTC choice would be to build a different device (different plate without a camera) or just ship the same plate with a camera or even leave certain components out of that plate (the lens) in the manufacturing process.

Here again, thinking positive, let’s say that it’s all there and they just covered it over with a different back case.

So we have the problem of the back casing and the maybe the fact that the camera button is missing on the left side of the device. (this you will have to tell me).

Anyway the solution to this is to obtain a display model of BA with camera, a task that I have tried in vain to achieve over the last 3 weeks as my BA is very badly dented.

Here again, thinking positive, let’s say we can get a display model and swap the casing out.

Thus you have the insides of the SX66 which has the hardware (well we think it does) and the casing that will support a camera.

2)	Software

What do we know about rom’s ?

Many months ago there was a SX66 1.3x rom (device with out camera) that was repacked by Manich and put on XDA.

This was a rom dump and the camera application was not in that image.

This rom was loaded be owners of the BA with camera and it worked but did not have the camera application.

(well it was a buggy Rom and in the long run and most went back to the I-mate 1.31 Arabic)

However on Wiki we placed a post install cab that added the needed files for the camera and these worked for that 1.3x Rom that is.

So we know for a fact that it can be done and we have proved it based on the past.

http://wiki.xda-developers.com/index.php?pagename=BA_Post

However Today we all taking about the 1.40 Type I Rom’s (I-mate or Qtec) which are built and shipped for the model PH20B (with camera).

I have loaded this rom and I find the camera application (Camera.exe) and many other files with camera in them under \windows

If you have loaded this rom and don’t find the Camera.exe then this must be due to the BaUpgradeUt.exe which checks to see what the Model number is and thus does not load all the files (in this case the Camera and in the case of the Harrier rom the WIFI).

This could also explain the file \Windows\Startup\Camera_Detect.exe which is found on my device (which has a camera) and may not be found on yours.

What we have also been able to work out is by using the MaUpgradeUt_noID we can bypass the Country Code error in the Type II roms, Seen in this thread.

http://xdaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=117645#117645

Files and instructions :

http://wiki.xda-developers.com/index.php?pagename=BA_FAQ_Upgrade_Errors

However we have not been able to test if we can by pass the device ID check (the one that checks if your device has a camera and thus loads those files).

The new tool that I have been Beta testing gives me the possibility to change the header of the rom to read that it is a non camera version.

However we have no tools that lets us tell the device that it is in fact a PH20B (With camera) and not a PH20B1 (without).

This would be the reverse of getdevciedata and a really interesting tool.

(putdevicedata.exe > devicedata.txt or write the device data out of my devicedata.txt onto my device thus getting the device to think it is a different device vs getting the rom to think it was built for a different device).

So MAYBE, just maybe flashing a non camera BA with the device ID PH20B by using the MA_upgrade will result in the device thinking that it has a camera and wifi and we could then test if this components are around (as in part of the hardware) or not by using them since the software has been loaded (you can find the files in windows).

So How do we move forward from here?

1)	I think we need to see the backplate of both devices

2)	We need to flash a non camera device with the MA_upgrade as a PH20B and see if we can find the files

3)	We need to play with the wifi and the camera of a device (that was PH20B1 but has been told its a PH20B) which has the back plate removed and the 1.40 as a rom on it

Given this we can prove or disprove the theory and who knows you might even find that wifi is around but the camera not.

Warning taking you device apart can revoke the warranty

Warning flashing your device has been know to turn it into a brick, do this at your own risk.

Hope that helps