Related
I found some glimmer of hope while searching for the wifi Chipset on the G1. It appears that the Texas Instruments TNETW1251 Wifi chipset does support UMA. Sooo.. given some time and kernel hacking, could developers be able to incorporate this and other UMA capable wifi chipsets in the Android OS?
http://focus.ti.com.cn/pdfs/wtbu/tnetw1251_1253_prod_bulletin.pdf
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=13005
pretty sure the wifi kernel module is closed source, so TI would have to have an update for it.
I thought that was appart of the update? I don't seem to have that? Is it like the trackball that they released the driver/api and some dev has to make a app to use it now? I was hopeful for the transmitter more than a reciver but I guess I am a big dreamer ;-)
That was never confirmed to be apart of the update - it was simply speculation that evolved into false hope.
Do we know for sure that the FM hardware exists?
wick12345 said:
I thought that was appart of the update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you provide a link to where/when Google stated that it would be part of 2.2?
Bet you can't
AndroidPerson said:
Do we know for sure that the FM hardware exists?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes we do...
Oddly, an app called "HTC Radio Info" is in the manage applications, all tab. Not sure if this has already been discussed?
Anyways, it was never confirmed, just speculated upon. And if it is an API, then I am sure we will see something come of it in due time.
Well, I have been skeptical about the FM radio because of the chip name.
"Of interest is a Broadcom chip labeled Broadcom BCM4329EKUBG. Why? Well, the BCM4329 (albeit, without the "EKUBG" qualifier) is capable of 802.11n (HTC only lists 802.11b/g) WiFi in addition to FM transmitter and receiver."
The chip name is not the same as the one with FM t/r but has been said to have it, which is pure speculation.
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329
But the Nexus One DOES have a wireless N radio and you can connect to N only networks.
evilkorn said:
Well, I have been skeptical about the FM radio because of the chip name.
"Of interest is a Broadcom chip labeled Broadcom BCM4329EKUBG. Why? Well, the BCM4329 (albeit, without the "EKUBG" qualifier) is capable of 802.11n (HTC only lists 802.11b/g) WiFi in addition to FM transmitter and receiver."
The chip name is not the same as the one with FM t/r but has been said to have it, which is pure speculation.
http://www.broadcom.com/products/Bluetooth/Bluetooth-RF-Silicon-and-Software-Solutions/BCM4329
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and in addition even if the chip supports it the fm radio section might not be connected. On these types of devices that have fm receivers they are usually wired to use the headphones as an antenna since an fm antenna is far too large to fit in the device. Ours might not have that much needed connection.
Mike
IF we got it this would not be the first device I have owned that a supposedly not working/not connected fm radio module suddenly became a working/connected fm module. Not saying one way or the other but its absence is not absolute proof.
Paul from modaco has managed to get it to tune into stations, but just not get any audio out.
krabman said:
IF we got it this would not be the first device I have owned that a supposedly not working/not connected fm radio module suddenly became a working/connected fm module. Not saying one way or the other but its absence is not absolute proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has a precedent, though - update for HTC Touch CDMA (HTC Vogue) enabling GPS receiver that was unused until then, existing in Qualcomm MSM7500 CPU of the Vogue.
So it was done before. The question is - would Google bother or would they just skip it and leave it to the community (if it's feasible at all, given that Desire has the same chip and connections - which isn't confirmed).
Thats what I mean I had a touch diamond NAM version with supposedly no fm because of some hardware deal and sure enough despite HTCs assurances that it could not be done the community got fm going after a time. I would bet there are other examples besides these.
Go to the bluetooth menu under ##DEBUG# with 2.2.1 and you'll see it says BCM4329 which is a 2.1+EDR chip. Right under that it will flat out say "BT_SPEC_VERSION_2_1".
Edit: Sorry for posting in the dev forum, I forgot I was still on there.
No. Epic 4G has bluetooth 2.1 and other galaxy s's have bluetooth 3.0. Simple is that and samsung did not lure about that.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Hmm, what chip do the other phones use?
Also, what's this supposed to mean? https://www.bluetooth.org/tpg/QLI_viewQDL.cfm?qid=16676
However, I noticed that the BCM4329 family does claim to have both FM receiver and transmitter capabilities... but then I guess that doesn't mean this particular chip, by the way it was worded - I hope it's not just wishful thinking
styles420 said:
However, I noticed that the BCM4329 family does claim to have both FM receiver and transmitter capabilities... but then I guess that doesn't mean this particular chip, by the way it was worded - I hope it's not just wishful thinking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of phones have FM chips disabled. The Nexus One has this same chip actually and a lot of people tried getting FM transmitting to work but I haven't seen anything yet.
I emailed someone at Phonescoop and they say the phone has Bluetooth 3.0 and linked me to the same certification site I posted previously.
Isn't Bluetooth 3.0 effectively do authentication via bluetooth and send file over wifi? not to mention not too many devices support it :/
Bluetooth 4.0 introduces most of the goodies.. like low power mode..
I was just wondering which version of Bluetooth will be running. I could not find it on Play or the Nexus 7 page so I have not idea if it is version 4.0 or something else.
Doc
Yeah I know, why don't any of the devs from Google IO answer on here? I guess they are just very busy and too excited right now maybe.
According to supercurio and preliminary data collected from a few of the devices, the Nexus 7 sports a BCM4329 or BCM4330 chip.
If it's the 4330 used we've got Bluetooth 4.0, if it's the 4329 it'll be Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR, so let's hope it's the former.
A lot of websites seems to be sure it's 4.0 as well, but not sure what their sources are.
Both chipsets also support FM radio, but not sure whether this is available or not. Too bad they didn't go for dual-band Wifi as well since both those chips support it. 2.4 GHz is getting crowded...
Einride said:
According to supercurio and preliminary data collected from a few of the devices, the Nexus 7 sports a BCM4329 or BCM4330 chip.
If it's the 4330 used we've got Bluetooth 4.0, if it's the 4329 it'll be Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR, so let's hope it's the former.
A lot of websites seems to be sure it's 4.0 as well, but not sure what their sources are.
Both chipsets also support FM radio, but not sure whether this is available or not. Too bad they didn't go for dual-band Wifi as well since both those chips support it. 2.4 GHz is getting crowded...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6054/google-nexus-7-mini-review Anandtech says it's the BCM4330.
Miracast is missing from Nexus 7's Android 4.2 release and we are all sad... and now you are seeing people say that Miracast will never come to Nexus 7 because it doesn't have Dual band wireless which is required.
Well I don't believe that Miracast requires Dual Band and here is why (good intro right?.. I wrote it myself)
Quoted from the Miracast whitepaper:
To be certified for Miracast, a device must also be Wi-Fi CERTIFIED for:
• Wi-Fi CERTIFIED n
• WPA2
• Wi-Fi Direct
• WMM
• Wi-Fi Protected Setup
While it is expected that TDLS certification will be commonly pursued for Miracast–certified devices, it is an optional component of the Miracast certification process. Miracast and TDLS are complementary, and vendors seeking Miracast certification for their products have the flexibility to choose whether they want to support TDLS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only thing I see see in the required list that would possibly have a bandwidth requirement would be Wi-Fi Direct (please correct me if i'm wrong) and Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5Ghz
Quoted from Wifi Alliance's FAQ page (http://www.wi-fi.org/knowledge-cent...-wi-fi-direct-certification-program-work-both):
Does the specification underlying the Wi-Fi Direct certification program work on both frequency bands?
Yes, the specification underlying the Wi-Fi Direct certification program supports operation in both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Devices operating in the 2.4 GHz frequency band only and devices operating in both the 2.4GHz and 5 GHz frequency bands can be certified under the Wi-Fi Direct program. Not all Wi-Fi Direct-certified devices will support both frequency bands, however, so you should check which bands your devices support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The TDLS Comment is interesting however as it does deal with Dual Band devices (see below). But again TDLS is optional for Miracast.
Quoted from TDLS Whitepaper (https://www.wi-fi.org/sites/default/files/uploads/20120808 TDLS White Paper FINAL.pdf):
In addition, TDLS also provides support for devices to negotiate an alternative channel. For example, if the two TDLS-linked devices are dual-band they may choose to dynamically switch to a 40MHz 802.11n channel in the 5 GHz band. The net result is a significant improvement in performance, latency and network capacity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It may perform like crap or have to be set to a hidiously small resolution (which could explain why Google decided to not include it off the bat) but there seems to be no reason why it won't work once some custom ROMs/APKs come out for it... Deep breath everybody.
Also, I'm a newb here and can only post every 5 mins till I get some "Thank-Love." If this helped anyone I'd sure appreciate a thumbs up.
To add to this, esrlabs made their own variant of miracast called android transporter and it's only currently for the nexus 7. It doesn't have sound current as it was just a tech demo.
sark666 said:
To add to this, esrlabs made their own variant of miracast called android transporter and it's only currently for the nexus 7. It doesn't have sound current as it was just a tech demo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
would love to see this functionality built into cyanogen eventually...
Sent from my Nexus 7
OP sounds right to me. Dual band is just nice to have because you could hypothetically segment Miracast from non-Miracast traffic. It's not necessary so I can imagine the N7 will support Miracast in due time.
The more I think of it, the major rom builder may shy away from building miracast into future builds for fear of infringement. Not sure how its all licensed but its very likely that the miracast portion is proprietary.
Our best hope may come from independent ports. Time will tell.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
ezieger said:
The more I think of it, the major rom builder may shy away from building miracast into future builds for fear of infringement. Not sure how its all licensed but its very likely that the miracast portion is proprietary.
Our best hope may come from independent ports. Time will tell.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so, Miracast is an open standard by the Wi-Fi Alliance. It probably costs money to be Miracast certified but ROM builders don't care about that.
Miracast is built into the 4.2 firmware for N4 but not yet N7 and N10. Why is that? Look to to the quote below from the Miracast wikipedia page.
Miracast software needs low level access to hardware supporting Wi-Fi Direct, there is no portable Wi-Fi Direct API for different SoCs and platforms. The lack of a single Application Programming Interface compatible with different Wi-Fi Direct supported hardware platforms makes it difficult for software developers to design portable Miracast Source or Sink applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it will just take some time. Less than six months, hopefully.
ezieger said:
The only thing I see see in the required list that would possibly have a bandwidth requirement would be Wi-Fi Direct (please correct me if i'm wrong) and Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5Ghz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right Wi-Fi Direct doesn't require 5GHz. I have the PTV3000 and I am stuck on my Nexus 7 at the same point I am with my 3 month old ASUS laptop with 3rd Gen Ivy Bridge i5. My laptop has a Qualcomm Atheros AR9485 wireless network chip. The Atheros is only 2.4 GHz but the AR9485 also includes 150 Mbps Data Rate, Atheros Direct ConnectTM peer-to-peer technology and is Wi-Fi Alliance CERTIFIED.
Intel's site is full of people ticked off that lost Wi-Di when they upgraded from Windows 7 to 8 that stopped working on their PTV2000/3000. I didn't get the PTV3000 before I upgraded to Windows 8 so I was doing a lot of research on my AR9485 that as I said is only 2.4 GHz.
So now I have a PTV3000, Nexus 7 and Laptop that none of them play together.
Netgear has sold so many of these damn ptv3000s on the basis of it being precertified for miracast and the expectation that the N7 would be. I'd love to see the sales numbers. Betting they spiked in the last two weeks and are back to almost nada. The whole situation is pretty frustrating.
Sent from my DROID X2 using xda app-developers app
Just to confirm, the ptv3000 is not certified for miracast? Doesn't it advertise that? I was going to pick one up if I saw one cheap (although with n7 currently not having miracast my interest has waned) but if it definitely doesn't I'll look elsewhere.
The ptv3000 is pre-certified. It needs a firmware update to be miracast. As of right now it doesn't even work with an N4. Best to just not buy anything until the smoke settles. Unless it's a crazy good deal... lol
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
ezieger said:
The ptv3000 is pre-certified. It needs a firmware update to be miracast. As of right now it doesn't even work with an N4. Best to just not buy anything until the smoke settles. Unless it's a crazy good deal... lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works with Galaxy S3
innov8ion said:
It works with Galaxy S3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you offer a sample? Video, photos, etc.
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sp...allshare-cast-netgear-ptv3000-w-miracast.html
innov8ion said:
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sp...allshare-cast-netgear-ptv3000-w-miracast.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The video doesn't seem to be pulling up on my screen
seriously. no video, no believe.
ezieger said:
The video doesn't seem to be pulling up on my screen
seriously. no video, no believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ask that guy. I'm skeptical too.
miracast not working with asus infinity tf700 either, that has tye
So, after the last firmware update, my Samsung s3 can project to ptv3000 ( though i had to use triangle away on my rooted s3 first). However, no such luck wih my asus inffinty tf700, which has the same isue as nexus 7 -stuck on 2.4ghz... i read somewhere that miracast requires 2.4 ghz to connct and 5 ghz to screencast. This might be true as my tf700 does show connected sometimes, but does not creencast. Asus tech support do not confirm or deny this.
---------- Post added at 10:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:18 PM ----------
So, after the last firmware update, my Samsung s3 can project to ptv3000 ( though i had to use triangle away on my rooted s3 first). However, no such luck wih my asus inffinty tf700, which has the same isue as nexus 7 -stuck on 2.4ghz... i read somewhere that miracast requires 2.4 ghz to connct and 5 ghz to screencast. This might be true as my tf700 does show connected sometimes, but does not creencast. Asus tech support do not confirm or deny this.
Wi fi direct 5 ghz
Does anybody knows if i use wi fi direct with 5ghz , intead of 2.4 ghz, could it reduce the lag while playing fast games like need for speed?
I have a MOTO X, so the only way to see the phine screen on tv is wifi direct or miracast