yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[G1 General] Aznneedlovetoo:
Yeah I don't care for the Apps menu button too, it doesn't bother me too much though. You should try LauncherPro its just as good.

Yeah as for the apps running in the background I highly suggest downloading Advanced Task Killer and turning on Auto-Kill. It saves a grip load of battery life.
[G1 General] dnd02220:
I'm using Cyanogenmod-5 For Dream/Magic - Mean Lean Pastry Machine - V5.0.8 (06/19/2010)on my G1 and it's fast.....
[G1 General] mejorguille:
To get the nexus squares back on the launcher on chromatic, install the latest system version of the ADW launcher (0.90) by pershoot. You do loose the cool symbol on the search bar and the highlight on the squares is back to orange, but everything else is the same. .86 is installed by default.

Edit: the link: http://droidbasement.com/db-blog/?p=680
[G1 General] jamesd86:
jubeh's AOSP 2.2 is pretty fast. no OC and no swap needed. camera and gps aren't important to me so i will be using this as a daily driver.
[G1 General] braddymcfadden:
The last couple of days, ive been trying to decide for myself on this exact topic. I suggest SpeedTeam for Eclair (its super fast and battery efficient; almost a full 2 days with light/medium use wwith close to 17% left on charge).

Jriv is right though. if you want fast, downgrade to superfast 1.3.3. Its rediculous how fast it is. by far the fastest ive used.
[G1 General] raven_raven:
I think that Chromatic 3.7 is the best and the fastest software for G1 by now. Also there is no errors in it, lots of theming and CM goodies + gapps + preinstalled apps like EStrongs File Explorer.
[G1 General] ultra spikey:
Are we talking about 2.1 ROMs here? Or any ROM? Because I have yet to find a 2.1 ROM with the speed of a 1.6 ROM.
[G1 General] Shrivel:
I have been running SuperD 1.9.3 for a week after using SuperE for a month. I honestly notice absolutely no difference in speeds averaged over time. Some tasks that are slow in Donut (web browsing) are faster in Eclair (task switching) and vice versa. I don't generally play any games or do any CPU intensive stuff, so I can't comment there, but for basic, everyday tasks, they both seem to perform about the same.

Battery life is the only thing that keeps me from using Eclair full time.
[HD2 General] hoss_n2:
there are some members reporting that hd2 can't reach over 65 mb/sec transfere speed due to hardware limitations in it's antenna , can any body confirm this
[HD2 General] DwTelecom:
mms pics & vidoes size

Does anyone have a fix for the mms message that come in to the phone they all come in small the screen is so large and the images are small in the middle
[HD2 General] hoss_n2:
not related to the thread , post it in any place , not here
[HD2 General] Garage101:
Hi All there!

Sorry for my English. I'm from Russia.

I try to get WiFi-.11n speed on my HD2 (not T-Mobile, but oficial Russian) connecting it to my D-Link DIR-825 WiFi-.11n router. (of course WiFi-.11n is turned on by doing HKLM/Comm/BCMSDDHD1/Parms 11nModeDisable = Change from 1 to 0 registry tweak)

1) When I setup my router to G-mode only, I see both transfer and receive speeds alike 54 megabits_per_sec in properties of WiFi connection on my HD2.

In this case I have real data transfer speed between HD2 and sheared folder on my PC about 1 megabyte_per_sec (as shown by RescoExplorer). It seems to me is's normal speed, because: :confused: 54/(~2) = 24 (real link speed). 24/8 = 3 megabytes_per_sec max data transfer speed. My "little" speed-leaks in this case does not metter for me now :confused:.

2) When I setup my router to N-mode only, I see both transfer and receive speeds alike Auto in properties of WiFi connection on my HD2. Infrequently receive speed become only 11 megabits_per_sec:(. But it does not metter, because in this case I have the same real data transfer speed between HD2 and sheared folder on my PC as on G-speed.:(

It seemed to me that in this case th speed must be much higher. To my mind... If link speed on WiFi-.11n is about 150 megabits_per_sec for 2,4 GHz. Then real link speed must be about 80 megabits_per_sec. And due this higher speed, the real data transfer speed between HD2 and sheared folder on my PC must be about 3-8 megabytes_per_sec or higher.

Here are my questions:

Especially want hoss_n2's answers, because it seems to me that he uses WiFi-.11n real speed on HD2.

- Am I wrong in my reasoning? What are my mistakes?

- How can I get real WiFi-.11n link and data transfer speed whith my equipment?

- Does anybody have real WiFi-.11n data transfer speed? Is it possible? I mean real data transfer speed between HD2 and sheared folder on PC higher then 3-5 (my be 8-10-20 :rolleyes:) megabytes_per_sec and ransfer and receive speeds shown in properties of WiFi connection on HD2 higher then 54 megabits_per_sec.

- Does anybody link HD2 in WiFi-.11N network using 5 GHz (not 2,4 GHz)? Is it possible?

- What firmwere do you use to reach real WiFi-.11N speed? Official?

хP.S. Don't ask me what for I need so high data transfer speed on my HD2, please. :)

Thank you for your answers.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] thephawx:
I'm not really too sure what engadget is trying to get across. The only thing I saw was the microscopic shot comparison as having any validity. But even then, if you need to 10x magnify a screen to see the difference, is it really worth it?

Then, they go and show pictures of the Super AMOLED display, which people are going to be seeing on an LCD!

So I took it upon myself to write up an article on my group blog, *visually* showing what the difference truly is.

Disclaimer: I own/operate the blog to the article link I am about to post.

http://www.brainlazy.com/article/smartphone/iphone-4-vs-samsung-galaxy-s

Let me know what you guys think. I'm currently getting all of the features into a Galaxy S review.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] oswade:
Nice analogies man hahaha. Good read :)
[Galaxy S I9000 General] MarvinTheAndroid:
The Galaxy S camera isn't "Back-side illuminated" - you should correct your comparison table.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] Toss3:
You really need to get your eyes checked if you need to be closer than 30 cm to see the pixels of the pentile screen. :p The only thing better about the Super Amoled screen is the blacklevels - that's it(besides size that is). The colors are off, the whites are pretty dim, the shadow detail is usually colored(due to the pixel structure) and you can clearly see color-banding which you cannot on the IPS display of the iPhone.

The Galaxy S is a better phone imho, but when it comes to the display the iPhone 4 has the SGS beaten.

EDIT: The SGS has a a Li-Ion battery not Li-Pol.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] dakine:
Anyone speak Italian?! If so look at this: youtube.com/watch?v=NMsl7ceJuK4
[Galaxy S I9000 General] thephawx:
Hey guys, thanks for the input. Does anyone have a link to the camera sensor? I had asked a Samsung Representative if they used a back-side illuminated cmos sensor and they replied in the affirmative.

Also, on this page: http://galaxys.samsungmobile.com/specification/spec.html?ver=low

They list the battery type at 1500 mAh li-pol.

I do agree the interpolated nature of the display has color banding issues, however, pixel density is a bit over rated. If you are critical of the SGS display at 30cm, I wonder how you've managed to cope with every computer monitor available today at 60cm. Even a 20" screen at 1080p is 111PPI, FAR lower than the SGS even with accounting for PenTile Matrix.

And if you can only list black levels as superior to LCD, maybe you need to play more fast paced video games. Response rate is critical. Between black levels and response rate, these are attributes that LCD will never be able to attain.

About color accuracy, I guess it's a toss up. Muddy blacks or color banding. Providing the amount of gradiation isn't intense, it's (almost) a non-issue. Shadowing (like you said) in media is a worry. But for most applications, you generally don't see long sprawling gradients.

And, I suppose pixel density is also subjective. I'd prefer to have true black and an immediate response rate. Also, while I can see the tiny little dots of pixels on my SGS at 30cm, they blend it very nice. Much nicer than my desktop monitor.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] desiibond:
superb article. hilarious and spot-on@
[Galaxy S I9000 General] AllGamer:
Agreed, I had a blast reading the article.

It's a perfect to explain the difference to the technically challenged people that thinks Iphone4 is the holly grail. :p

now, the next best way to show technically challenged people is by having another one of these cool comparison but using an Iphone4 instead.

HTC Desire vs. Galaxy S

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpP5QljEqow

assuming some one manages to run Quake 2 on an Iphone4 LOL :D
[Galaxy S I9000 General] chaoscentral:
btw in the chart near the end, you listed the gyro as Captivate model only, but its on all us models as far as I'm aware
[Galaxy S I9000 General] thephawx:
Yea, I have to update the info since the NYC event. Also Samsung used lower numbers for response rate and contrast ratio, so I have to change my dollars/cents thing.

They lowered it exactly by half on each. So instead of 100,000:1 CR, they said 50,000:1. And instead of Response rate at 1 micro second they said 10 microseconds. Which is an order of magnitude different, but still very very nice.

Basically the the money will be chopped in half. Either way, I double checked with a Samsung rep and when I fix those things up, the chart will be accurate.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] karunadheera:
Images missing.

Thanks. Great article.

Can't see the images though.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] FuryriderX:
Yea the images are missing for me too! When i click where they should be, i get a 404 not found error.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] TriC_101:
Samsung is a genious...

Many dumbasses would say "The Galaxy S" doesnt have Flash is a BAD THING..

But to me.. its a GOOD THING ... iPhone 4 uses Single LED flash... This type of flash doesnt even have enough power to make a difference in your picture quality.. its more like a BULL**** feature to trick noobs to﻿ buy it.

You need at least a Dual LED/Xenon Flash...
[Galaxy S I9000 General] Billus:
Your kidding right? I've compared my phone to my mates iPhone 4 and the SGS is clearly superior. It has far better color and webpages are easily readable without zooming in whereas on the iPhone, it's a different story.

Obviously, we compared the two phones at full brightness. He has also returned his new iPhone and continues to use his 3g instead which aesthetically, looks better than the iPhone 4.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] TriC_101:
How come he returned his iphone4 is he going to get a Samsung S?
[Galaxy S I9000 General] alovell83:
I'll take the Galaxy S hands down any day of the week, particularly the screen and OS. However,

I just flat out disagree with this testing procedure. It's borderline retarded IMHO.

[*]Firstly, especially with the webpages with reading (the thing you brought up half a line prior, though albeit in a different paragraph) reading demands low brightness.

[*]Secondly, read the posts here, everyone is turning the brightness to "0%", low, and even download an app that brings that "0%" down to true 0% rather than the 8% that it actually uses. People are doing this because it's easier on the eyes, saves battery and a multitude of other reasons.

[*]Thirdly, this screen is plenty bright without full brightness. Even in direct sunlight you don't need this at full brightness, the screen is that good (again, love it)

Really, in summary, the way you should test both devices is the real-world usage scenario. Anything else and all you are doing is showing off it's potential, not it's practical use. Again, I think I've posted here or another thread or both how much I was against the Engadget test, particularly because they lead with the macro lens shots. To me, that was sensationalist, they were trying to either get "oohs and ahhs" or make Apple look as good as possible. Either way, that's journalism at its worst and not even something I want to read in a blog I visit. However, to do something like turn brightness up all the way is just a tiny bit better...unless this is actually how you or your friend would use the device regularly. Again, I believe that each device can even, have an independent setting, one at 0% and one at 100% if that's how the user would typically use the device. To get back to my Engadget point, that's why it's important to give as many views and settings as possible. Compare them all, find out where one's strengths lie because you have such a wide audience. However, I'm not sure how many people use a macro lens to view their device on a daily basis, so leading with that is just retarded. Do I think it's completely irrelevant? Maybe not as perhaps there are some people who wouldn't get the detail needed because they have near super-human perfect vision where they can detect all these things that are too minor to even be called subtleties.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] Ptechnix:
I have to say that in terms for average daily use, there isn't any real practical difference between the two phones at face value. I have a SGS, my wife has the iPhone 4 btw. But that being said, after spending any length of time with the iPhone 4, you will notice a difference once you go back to the SGS. If may not be initially obvious, but your eyes will be able to discern the difference.

If you're using the phone to read mucho text, I'm sorry, there is no way the SGS can trump the iPhone 4. The iPhone 4 retina display is a beautiful one and I guarantee that if you use both for decent amount of time with an unbiased mind, you WILL notice the difference in terms of text definition and clarity.

However, when it comes to motion and movies, the SGS takes a dump all over the iphone. The iPhone, whilst still great to watch movies on, can't compare to the far superior contrast, colours, and vibrancy of the SGS AMOLED screen. When you have motion on screen and you're not squinting at text, the high pixel density, to me, almost doesn't even factor into the equation anymore.

So there's my two cents. I wouldn't trade my SGS for her iPhone 4 at all, however, I would probably sing a different tune if I did a lot of e-reading or web browsing on my phone. After using the iPhone to browse text for even a few minutes, I hated going back and doing the same on my SGS. Anyway, to say one display is practically (not technically) superior to the other only depends on the purpose of which you'll be using it for. Both are great and I don't see why people have to argue the point that one has to be better than the other.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] AllGamer:
hmm... i like reading my webpages at full brighness

i hate dim LCD or any kind of screens
[Galaxy S I9000 General] alovell83:
Agree completely. My uses is what got me into the device. However, a guy come on here saying he was going to use this like an e-reader (novels) first and foremost, webpage viewer in the house on wifi quite a bit, with the tiniest bit of PMP qualities. He was asking something specifically about what apps to get IIRC, I told him to buy a Kindle, iPad or iPhone 4 (I think I rated the iPhone 4 above the iPad because of the portability that he desired, but can't quite remember). If I wasn't into A/V (plus an Android fan) I might not have this device.

That's cool, to each their own. I can see webpages being a bit more brightness required than e-ink, but as I said just in my opinion, this device is just flat out bright. But I think it's both of our opposite tastes here that made Samsung put in an independent (I think that's how it works rather than in aggregate with, though perhaps there is some mix...don't really care as I leave both all the way down) brightness control into the web browser. So you won't have to adjust your brightness up when going to the web and if I happened to be walking around on a sunny day I wouldn't have to adjust it downwards.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] wfhowell:
not true..i have an iphone 4 and a Galaxy S. the flash helped the iphone cam a LOT......not a gimmic...no its not the best flash..but its better than none for sure
[Galaxy S I9000 General] wfhowell:
yoiu are correct on the screen. I notice a difference going from iphone to SGS. i like the SGS for vibrancy, and the iphone 4 for claity. One is good as the other...both excellent
[Galaxy S I9000 General] bilboa1:
few things...

- can't see pictures

- i dont think response time matters on a phone... lol

- i can see the ip4 fonts smaller and better but the sgs has a bigger screen, at the end of the day im as happy on both for web reading, except the sgs has better contrast/nicer colors (i dont care if they're accurate or not, i couldn't tell). certainly having a higher density would be even more awesome

- the ip4 led flash is actually pretty damn powerful and it allow u to take close pictures (eg faces, friends etc) in the dark, where the sgs cannot

- the sgs camera takes surprisingly good pictures at dawn/mid darkness (but just cannot take pics in deep darkness whereas the ip4 can do that)
[Galaxy S I9000 General] ozy944:
Sammy didnt leave out the flash because they are "geniuses" (if thats a word)

They left it out due to tolerances (slim form factor, design, chips, micro usb etc) and simply to save a few bucks on each device (x a couple million) = millions saved.

Personally Id have preferred an led flash, if only to use as a torch light. Pity its not there but Im sure I'll live :).

Better resolution on the iphone 4 comes at the huge expense of a small screen (compared to the galaxy s).

I chose the captivate due to the samoled and my allegiance to HTC is truly being tested...unless of course, the new set of phones use an IPS display. Im not too fussed about screen res.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] cheetah2k:
I disagree that the iphone 4 beats the SGS screen. I have both phones and have compared them side by side.

IMO, the colour on the iphone 4 is very ordinary, and certainly the slow refresh is noticed when swiping from screen to screen...

The richness of the SGS SA screen is simply amazing. So much so that I want a Samsung Super Amoled LED TV!!!

The only thing that lets the SGS down is the software. While I don't mind touchwiz (prefer launcher pro), they need to fix all the bugs ASAP, and migrate what they have learnt from 2.1 and apply in 2.2. Samsung has a poor reputation for updates, and if they do the right thing, the SGS will become a phone platform that they can build on in years to come.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] opensourcefan:
It's been said before and I will repeat it, it doesn't matter what a screen looks like magnified or or 1 inch away. What matters is what it looks like in a state of use and taking that into account the SGS screen is WAY better.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] LostAlone:
Man I love that blog post dude. Im glad I wasn't the only person who saw that Engadget article and immediately thought it was bull****. Engadget are shameless shills for iProducts and it really pisses me off. Every iPhone vs blank has always ended up deciding the iPhone is better because of utterly esoteric 'innovations' and a total lack of knowledge of the good sides of android.

Im still yet to find a dedicated source of apple news that doesn't descend into rampant fanboyism. Even the main stream media seems to bend over for apple products and greets everything new with such orgasmic joy that you'd think the people reviewing them had never seen a magic picture box before, and indeed definitely had no knowledge of the exactly identical previous iteration. Case in point, the new iPod shuffle, which is exactly the same as the second one, but still seems to be getting rave reviews, despite offering the same functionality. *sigh*.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] Berserk87:
Apple articles = lots of hits = losts of $$$.

Thats why EVERYONE posts them.

Also...OP.

I can't see your pictures in your article.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] Logicalstep:
Well I'm not sure if any of you have seen my post on the the SGS screen, but there is NO doubt that the Iphone 4 screen is crisper. It's a fact.

The SGS screen however has amazing contrast. I wouldn't say the solour reproduction is that great, whites look grey-ish most of the time.

Response times don;t mean anything on phones, unless it's ultra slow you would never be able to guess the response time of a phones screen in a million years!

I would say that if Samsung Released an IPS version of their phone they would have the market sewn up. People could then choose what we more important to them.

One Thing I would add is that if Samsung stop using a Pentile martix you would really have a hard time seeing the difference.

Logicalstep
[Galaxy S I9000 General] darkoroje:
What you call "richness of color" is actually oversaturation - the colors do not look natural on the Galaxy S. So for example if you take photos on the Galaxy and look at them on Galaxy's screen they do no look the same as they will once printed. Some people like this, and some don't.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] alovell83:
Disagree on the IPS comment. AMOLED is popular and SAMSUNG, mostly, fixed it's biggest flaw...direct viewing in sunlight. Additionally, I don't think this would affect sales much but if you think Samsung catches a lot of flack for copying Apple imagine if they went with an IPS screen where they were trying to get something like Apple's pixel density, it'd be an endless "I don't want an iPhone imposter" blog comment fest (again, not trying to say that should matter or would impact sales). Lastly, on the pentile, I do agree with the sentiment, but what you are asking for isn't really feasible if I'm not mistaken. Is it possible to print screens another way, yes, of course. Is it cheap, is it easy to mass produce, will the weak LEDs last long enough in the device (this is probably arguable since smartphone lifetimes are considerably shorter than things like TVs and monitors, but it's still in a manufacturers mind)? As a point, I forget the weak color, but I think it might be blue, dying early in life, so they need to double them...?

As far as color accuracy goes, I don't know of any reports on it getting better in the future. However, Samsung is reportedly very close to being able to get mass production of higher pixel density screens so their image crispness in a year should rival what the IPS in the iPhone is doing. To anyone who would think, well IPS can get better, well another producer would have to use them because Apple is concerned about keeping a fairly standard resolution so we might not be able to count on a bigger screen size or higher pixel density for some time.

Samsung has, arguably the best screen in the smartphone game, with their eyes on the future for; smartphones, tablets and tv/laptop/desktop monitors...I think they are doing what is right in the long-term for both sides of their business, the part that sells finished goods and the part that supplies screens to the industry. It's hard to say that they should've went with IPS when there is competition there and there is no competition in this area that Samsung has a monopoly with an ever improving tech.
[Galaxy S I9000 General] darkoroje:
Amoled can be done with standard RGB pixel arrangement the reason Samsung uses pentile is because it is cheaper. Pentile RGBG screens like the one used in Galaxy have one third less subpixels so are cheaper to produce. The idea is that because the human eye is more sensitive to green color the number of subpixels can be less without reducing percieved display resolution. Unfortunately that also causes some colors such as grey yo become distorted and the edges of text to become less sharp or fuzzy.

Color accuracy could easily be improved by simply using a different gamma (color mapping) table in the driver. However that would make the display look less "vibrant" especially in a typical shop that has neon lighting with a limited color spectrum.
[Galaxy S I9000 Themes and Apps] lgkahn:
i tried renameing this to update.zip and installing from recovery console the same way but it wouldnt install maybe someone can modify it to work:

thanks

larry

http://bandwidth.lgk.com/HTC_SENSE_LWP_signed.zip

note this is installed from recovery console on nexus one..