Database Users

HTC "video driver" bug causing issues for many users?

Anyone know what this about?
http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/...-angry-mobile-owners-rush-castle-htc-with-bu/
link to the xda thread about it?

This is about a group of litigation-crazed people who want to file a class-action suit against a device manufacturer (HTC) because the manufacturer did not include a functionality that would be technologically possible to include in a device. Since class-action suits are overwhelmingly just scams where the lawyers literally make millions for a few hours work, and the companies sued get to give you a coupon for a future purchase thereby increasing the chance you will, in fact, make a future purchase from them, I make no prediction as to whether a suit will be filed or settled in the customary way. However, in a "real" law suit, there is no way the courts would require a company to include all technologically possible features in a product, regardless of how "easy" it might allegedly be to include them. Note that in this case, neither HTC nor the carriers (as far as I have heard) ever stated that this functionality was included in the device.

Yeah, I don't know where that is coming from... of all the issues with the phone.. video is the least. BT still sucks as well as the phone turning on and off at will. Not checking email when it is supposed to... etc etc.

yakky said:
Yeah, I don't know where that is coming from... of all the issues with the phone.. video is the least. BT still sucks as well as the phone turning on and off at will. Not checking email when it is supposed to... etc etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you should file a class-action suit against the video driver class-action people for taking HTC's time and attention away from fixing real problems...

Actually the mogul does have video playback issues with constant stutering and pausing. From what I've heard from 6700 users video playback is much much smoother (the way it should be). I don't know if it calls for a law suit but hey at least they got htc's attention and now their releasing new drivers that will supposedly fix the video playback issues.

bakntyme said:
This is about a group of litigation-crazed people who want to file a class-action suit against a device manufacturer (HTC) because the manufacturer did not include a functionality that would be technologically possible to include in a device. Since class-action suits are overwhelmingly just scams where the lawyers literally make millions for a few hours work, and the companies sued get to give you a coupon for a future purchase thereby increasing the chance you will, in fact, make a future purchase from them, I make no prediction as to whether a suit will be filed or settled in the customary way. However, in a "real" law suit, there is no way the courts would require a company to include all technologically possible features in a product, regardless of how "easy" it might allegedly be to include them. Note that in this case, neither HTC nor the carriers (as far as I have heard) ever stated that this functionality was included in the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep your feces to yourself. if you have nothing better to do but flame a valid issue on HTC phones then i suggest to go jump off a hill.

SINNN said:
Keep your feces to yourself. if you have nothing better to do but flame a valid issue on HTC phones then i suggest to go jump off a hill.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you afraid for someone to post a valid, opposing viewpoint to yours? Can you not accept that someone who disagrees with you may still have a valid point? My post was not flaming at all, your post however seems to utilize nothing but flame to express your thoughts. Now, please post again with a well-thought-out response to my points as opposed to a simple flame, as I am interested in an intelligent response and will read it with an open mind.
While you are at it, maybe you can explain why, if all that is needed is a simple driver and all graphics problems will be solved with no detrimental side-effects, no one here on xda-developers, where I truly believe there is at least as much talent as at HTC, has done the allegedly simple task of writing or finding that driver and distributing it.

bakntyme said:
Why are you afraid for someone to post a valid, opposing viewpoint to yours? Can you not accept that someone who disagrees with you may still have a valid point? My post was not flaming at all, your post however seems to utilize nothing but flame to express your thoughts. Now, please post again with a well-thought-out response to my points as opposed to a simple flame, as I am interested in an intelligent response and will read it with an open mind.
While you are at it, maybe you can explain why, if all that is needed is a simple driver and all graphics problems will be solved with no detrimental side-effects, no one here on xda-developers, where I truly believe there is at least as much talent as at HTC, has done the allegedly simple task of writing or finding that driver and distributing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel the need to address this... despite not having been in the original exchange. I can accept that you have a differing viewpoint from us. I refuse to be called a "litigation-crazed" person. I also think you need to get your facts straight before you pass judgment.
The simple fact is - we want the functionality that our devices were advertised with. Many of us did our research and realized that the MSM7500 is a POWERFUL chip. The video acceleration is top-tier, and everything else seemed good too. Then HTC decided to not include a driver for video acceleration. Also, before someone mentions that HTC has claimed(but never in an official press release) that the MSM7500 might NOT include the video acceleration... When have you known a huge manufacturer(nVidia, AMD, Intel, ATi, Qualcomm, etc) to name two differing devices the same name? They don't. they generally qualify them(e.g. 8800 series nVidia cards can be 8800 GT, GTX, GTS, etc.) What HTC did is akin to Dell selling you an Inspiron notebook with an nVidia 8800GTS card inside, then telling you that they didn't include drivers. Oh, and don't forget that nVidia won't support the card, since it's up to the manufacturer(Dell) to supply the drivers. Microsoft won't do it since it's Dell's problem. Dell won't do it because it isn't cost effective. (Suspend the reality of the situation for the analogy, though, please) Now you're left with a $300 piece of video hardware that can't be used because nobody wanted to provide a driver. Go software acceleration! That's the issue we're having. The phones WERE advertised as having the MSM7500(or 7200) which according to everything I've seen both have video acceleration. HTC just dropped the ball.
Now, about us writing our own drivers... That would be difficult without getting a bunch of information from Microsoft, HTC and Qualcomm, which they won't release. If you don't know why, look up open source video drivers for Linux, and you'll understand the pain. It's not a baseless suit - however I don't think that class action is the way to go. I think we need to work WITH MS, HTC, and Qualcomm to come up with a driver. Period. Don't let up the pressure until we have that.

I am sorry, but when your advocacy group starts out with a name like "HTCClassAction", and names its website "htcclassaction.org", it shows itself as not interested in getting the claimed result, but instead, despite any protestations from the group, interested in filing a class-action lawsuit from the beginning. That is "litigation-crazed". Was "htcvideodrivers.org" not available? I am sure that, if you wanted to, given a few minutes you could come up with several non-litigation-oriented group and website names. If you were the product manager for the 6800 at HTC, and you heard of the issues raised by the group HTCClassAction, would you think, "Here is a group of users that wants to work with us to resolve what they see as a legitimate issue?"
Speaking of facts...have you actually seen an advertisement that stated that the devices came with this functionality, or did you just assume that because it was advertised as having this chipset, and the chipset has this capability, that the functionality would be included? I would bet that HTC never stated that the 6800 would include every feature technologically possible with the chipset. It has the capability of supporting an 8MP camera, but they didn't include that either. Another lawsuit? I am sure there are other things the chipset would be CAPABLE of that were not included. If you actually researched the chipset so thoroughly for this issue prior to purchasing the device, why did you not notice in the first 30 days that it was not included, and return the device?
Realize that modern class-action lawsuits are almost always settled for lots of money to the attorneys and a pittance to the class. Remember the Verizon Moto 710 Bluetooth class action? It was settled as usual...the attorneys got somewhere around $6 million; users got $25 if they wanted to keep the 710 and stay with Verizon, a waived ETF and a refund if they wanted to leave Verizon, and a credit toward another device if they wanted to stay with Verizon but not keep the 710. They did not get additional Bluetooth profiles. And if this goes to trial, the courts will never order a manufacturer to provide technology, and support for it, that the manufacturer does not want to provide. IF you could prove false advertising, and I do not think that you could, you might get a small refund or credit toward another phone. If that is what you want, just sell the device on an internet auction site and buy something else...you will probably get more that way.

sucks too that our phones dont even have the ati chip in them. my htc wizard (old school) had better video and gameplay

I don't play games much on my ppc so this problem hasn't affected me as much. However I did notice that PIE was sluggish and freaked when video playback sucked on WM and TCPMP. Most of that was avoided by using GDI on TCPMP.
The real issue here is why can't they add the driver? If it was a simple fix it probably wouldn't have been left out in the first place. Sounds to me like they ran into technical issues trying to make it work.

I just got the mogul last week. I have 30 days to evaluate it. Do you think that I should have gotten something else? I think that I've had at least 10 different Smartphones & PPC's in the past 5 or 6 years. They all have something I dislike about them. This one is the best one I've had yet, but would you recommend something else? THANKS

johnannie said:
I just got the mogul last week. I have 30 days to evaluate it. Do you think that I should have gotten something else? I think that I've had at least 10 different Smartphones & PPC's in the past 5 or 6 years. They all have something I dislike about them. This one is the best one I've had yet, but would you recommend something else? THANKS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you hit the nail on the head. EVERY PPC is going to have SOMETHING you dont like about it.
with that said. it only matters what you think. dont go taking advice from a forum where 50 percent of its members cant even tie their shoes.
For the record, i agree with what the person said way up at the beginnning of the thread. "Why are you *****ing now when you had 30 days in which to evaluate and return it if you felt the need?!""
I would imagine the courts will say the same. everyone who thinks this is a legit complaint needs to get a hobby. you all had 30 days in which to make your decision, so DEAL with it.
sound like a buncha kids to me
I guess we should sue them for not having a 'tv out' jack on the mogul too, since thats also possible. and oh yeah, where's my 8 megapixel camera on the mogul?? it supports that as well.
ah screw it, im going to cry to mommy

watson540 said:
you hit the nail on the head. EVERY PPC is going to have SOMETHING you dont like about it.
with that said. it only matters what you think. dont go taking advice from a forum where 50 percent of its members cant even tie their shoes.
For the record, i agree with what the person said way up at the beginnning of the thread. "Why are you *****ing now when you had 30 days in which to evaluate and return it if you felt the need?!""
I would imagine the courts will say the same. everyone who thinks this is a legit complaint needs to get a hobby. you all had 30 days in which to make your decision, so DEAL with it.
sound like a buncha kids to me
I guess we should sue them for not having a 'tv out' jack on the mogul too, since thats also possible. and oh yeah, where's my 8 megapixel camera on the mogul?? it supports that as well.
ah screw it, im going to cry to mommy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hahahahaha. Yes, we're children. Little babies, the lot of us. Anyway......
No, we shouldn't sue them for not including a tv-out jack or an 8 megapixel camera. What we are trying to achieve is driver support FOR THE INCLUDED HARDWARE. This is what most people who argue against our position fail to realize. We aren't asking them to do something crazy, like give us a better camera or a tv-out jack, or even more memory. We're asking them to SUPPORT THE HARDWARE THEY SOLD US. Gasp.
Now... I'll use an analogy for those among us who are a bit retarded. If you were to buy a car that was advertised with a special computer chip in it that can control a supercharger, the electronic stability control system, up to 6 airbags, and the radio (all of which are included in your car, albeit only 4 airbags) - and it came with a 30-day money-back guarantee... and you drove it for 30 days and thought to yourself, "Wow, this is clearly better than last years' model" - would you return it? Probably not... That's what happened here.
We bought our phones, tried them and went, "Wow, they kicked the crap out of the <insert old PDA phone here>" and kept them. Now, back to our example. Now imagine you go to a car-meet-up with your new fancy car, and everyone there is talking about how <insert another fast car here> is wayyyy faster than their car, in the same conditions. You and the other owners do some research and find out that the car manufacturer didn't include software to make your supercharger work. It's just inert, sitting there looking pretty. Wouldn't you be pretty pissed that the chip in your car wasn't actually using the supercharger? Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger, that the supercharger would actually work?
Anyway - that's where I'm coming from at least - I don't presume to speak for anyone else though. I will say this though, watson540, you need to calm down. You're running around these forums beating on people's opinions and posts. Frankly, yours aren't much more productive. At least try to post something relevant or meaningful... or at the very least something other than "you moron, rtft" or "you moron, stop crying".

it's not really a bug its more
like a pc with the generic vga driver installed
even if the pc have a geforce
problems is that one cant get hold of the
spc driver to replace the generic

ponicg said:
We bought our phones, tried them and went, "Wow, they kicked the crap out of the <insert old PDA phone here>" and kept them.
...
Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger, that the supercharger would actually work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, so you admit that you were very satisfied with the performance until someone said "Hey, I think they OWE US something MORE than what we got, let's SUE THEM for it?" If the device met your needs when you tested it, then you have no complaint. If it did not, you should have returned it in the 30 day return period.
As I asked you way back in this thread, but you have not yet addressed, (nor any of the other points in my previous post), "have you actually seen an advertisement that stated that the devices came with this functionality, or did you just assume that because it was advertised as having this chipset, and the chipset has this capability, that the functionality would be included?...If you actually researched the chipset so thoroughly for this issue prior to purchasing the device, why did you not notice in the first 30 days that it was not included, and return the device?"
None of these analogies is perfect...one big flaw in yours is that you hypothesized "If you were to buy a car that was advertised with a special computer chip in it that can control a supercharger," then switched to the car actually having a supercharger advertised: "Wouldn't you expect that if it was advertised as having this chip and a supercharger". Another is that the supercharger's existence is open and apparent to someone who looks under the hood, without requiring any research or disassembly of the vehicle. Another is that in chip manufacturing, it is usually more efficient to produce a batch of chips with all the capabilities, then use the ones you want in each device, as opposed to redesigning the chip package and retooling the production run for each combination of features desired in each application. No one could reasonably say that it was more efficient to produce a factory run of cars with all possible mechanical features (such as the supercharger in your example) included, and then only connect and use the ones desired for that model. However, auto manufacturers also sometimes utilize parts and sub-assemblies in a particular model without enabling or utilizing all of that component's capabilities, when doing so is more efficient.
Since you like automotive analogies, I will use one without resorting to calling anyone "a bit retarded": suppose that Ford announced that all 2010 Mustangs would use the new computer chip from Super Tuner Corporation, "because of its wonderful and powerful new capabilities," with no details as to what particular features would be made available. Your research into the chip on Super Tuner's website revealed that it supported superchargers, turbochargers, four-wheel drive, four-wheel steering, and nitrous fuel systems. You went in to a Ford dealer and test-drove the top-of-the-line 2010 Mustang, were impressed by its performance, and bought it. Six months later, someone pointed out that you had received none of those performance items listed above. You did not know why, but it was because Ford had internally determined pre-production that the suspension and frame would not be sufficient to provide those performance items in any model Mustang, and they did not want to re-engineer the support structure. They made no announcement about these features not being available, as they had never made any announcement about including those features. Would you join the MustangClassAction.org group? Now suppose that you had done no research prior to the purchase, and six months later discovered the information on Super Tuner's website after someone pointed out the lack to you...even less valid a complaint then, isn't it?
And further suppose that at the same time, someone else says, "I took the interior of my Mustang apart, and it has mounts for 8 speakers, and they only provided it with 4 speakers. Ford has to install 4 more speakers in every Mustang, because it has the capability of holding them!"
And another owner pulls out his factory radio, notices the output jack on the back for a subwoofer..."Where is my subwoofer? It obviously was supposed to come with my car, or they would not have included a radio that could support one and put a jack on the back of the radio to plug one in!!"
Meanwhile, another owner says "I was testing the electronic trip computer included in my Mustang, the same one included in all 2010 Mustangs, and it has the ability to calculate and display up to 55 MPG, but my Mustang only gets 23 MPG. Obviously, Ford was advertising a Mustang that would get 55 MPG and must give us that!"
Enough analogies? Would you get angrier, and call Ford arrogant, when they say, "Thank you for your business, customers, but we never said the Mustang had those capabilities, and we have no intention of retrofitting them, but we will take your opinions into account in designing our next vehicle?"
Analogies by their nature will never replicate the Titan/Mogul/6800 situation. However, we can discuss the 6800 situation itself, and I am waiting for your answer about the HTC advertisement and your not discovering the lack in the first 30 days of your device ownership.

its just bull**** when the the video playback on the 6700 is alot better than the titan. makes no sense at all and yes i feel ripped off.

im no expert..but from over here it looks like bakntyme just put all of you crybabies in your place
very well said bakntyme. perfect.
p.s. yeah im an asshole. but this asshole can read and troubleshoot and operate electronics all by my big self.
read these forums enough and you will start to think everyone in the world collectively never got out of elementary school
apologies where they are due. but some people are incredible helpless (this last comment has nothing to do with this thread im responding to the guy above who "called me out" for being an (admitted) asshole)

unless you guys can come up with some previous claim by HTC that the mogul was supposed to support this specific capability of the chip, i dont see how you guys can try to force anything out of them. I'm with bakntyme on this one.
Sure its pretty crappy that they put the hardware in there and didnt support it, and im no lawyer, but it doesnt seem like they would be under any legal obligation to support the video drivers.

watson540 said:
im no expert..but from over here it looks like bakntyme just put all of you crybabies in your place
very well said bakntyme. perfect.
p.s. yeah im an asshole. but this asshole can read and troubleshoot and operate electronics all by my big self.
read these forums enough and you will start to think everyone in the world collectively never got out of elementary school
apologies where they are due. but some people are incredible helpless (this last comment has nothing to do with this thread im responding to the guy above who "called me out" for being an (admitted) asshole)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although I appreciate the support, a more professional wording of it might help to keep from increasing the level of emotions and inflammation on this issue.

If you wipe user data on a stock TNT 1.0.1 device, you now get a EULA

Someone else mentioned this earlier, but I hadn't seen it until just now. EDIT: the original poster: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9374284&postcount=23
Well, a note to TnT management, if you happen to read this. I didn't click "Agree", so phooey on you.
Btw, it's things like this which made me decide to never accept donations. Once I start doing that, I'm crossing over somewhere that I really don't want to go - TnT / Viewsonic, please keep that in mind.
EDIT: To Viewsonic CS -- I had two devices (one was going to be a gift to a relative, and I was going to leave TnT on it). I now have one device, and the main reason is because of that insane EULA. Specifically, section 4.1 and, to a lesser extent, 4.2. You should have a chat with that company and have them explain what the heck they were thinking.
If a larger tablet company like Archos did this, Engadget and other tech sites would roast them alive.

roebeet said:
Someone else mentioned this earlier, but I hadn't seen it until just now.
Well, a note to TnT management, if you happen to read this. I didn't click "Agree", so phooey on you.
Btw, it's things like this which made me decide to never accept donations. Once I start doing that, I'm crossing over somewhere that I really don't want to go - TnT / Viewsonic, please keep that in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One reason I bought the sears warrenty for 60 bucks. So I am not to worried if Viewsonic is going to honor their warrenty

Doesn't look that strange for a commercial products EULA. Frankly I think we all have violated EULA many times on many devices/software. I do agree that accepting donations does create a different situation, but I don't think anyone should be scared off by it. Just read a Windows EULA, or the FBI warning on a DVD, or listen to the NBA rights (or lack thereof) before any game.
They make it excessively broad so that if they elect to they can crack down on any modders (if it cuts into their bottom line) by issuing cease and desist orders. Since TapUI is still making money by including it (even if we don't use it) and we aren't modifying so much as removing it I think there is very minimal chance of legal difficulty.
Then again, stranger things have happened.

Whoever (Ok, mgmt Roebeet) decided to include TnT was either a relative, or a used car salesman. If anyone had actually used the device instead of just listening to someone talk it up in a meeting I can't see it ever being released.
And I mean no disrespect to used car salesman by comparing them to whoever sold VS on TnT.

akodoreign said:
One reason I bought the sears warrenty for 60 bucks. So I am not to worried if Viewsonic is going to honor their warrenty
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I bought the extended warranty from Staples.

Closing - keeping for informational purposes only.

Pocketnow.com just sabataged us!

I just happened to read an article over at pocket now:
http://pocketnow.com/windows-phone/microsoft-on-hacked-windows-phone-7-and-live-services
titled: Microsoft On Hacked Windows Phone 7 And Live Services
in their vain search for headline news it seems pocketnow made it a part of their duty to have Microsoft look into us getting Live ID keys for our HD2s running Windows Phone 7. Now Microsoft is saying their going to take a hard look into this pratice. who knows what is going to happen if Microsoft is going to ban the issued keys
by the amount of mad faces you can tell i'm pissed.
wether Microsoft new about what was going on or not, pocketnow just amplified the issue.

It was strange that Pocketnow chose to push Microsoft on the issue. Microsoft seemed to be (deliberately?) ignoring the HD2-WP7 key issue. Pocketnow is just forcing them to take a position - which helps noone (except Pocketnow).
I imagine that Microsoft wont be too active in pursuing our phones. They will probably just put in place a policy to restrict new keys.

Perhaps everyone is just jealous of us & our HD2....

coolfire said:
Perhaps everyone is just jealous of us & our HD2....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like thats the case.

link is dead anyways >.<

Ive been following pocketnow.com for years, very disappointed in them for forcing this and publishing this article.
F*CK you Anton D Nagy!!!!!
jcsy said:
link is dead anyways >.<
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://pocketnow.com/windows-phone/microsoft-on-hacked-windows-phone-7-and-live-services
Everybody should leave a comment on the article to show how let down you feel with them/author.

TheATHEiST said:
Ive been following pocketnow.com for years, very disappointed in them for forcing this and publishing this article.
F*CK you Anton D Nagy!!!!!
http://pocketnow.com/windows-phone/microsoft-on-hacked-windows-phone-7-and-live-services
Everybody should leave a comment on the article to show how let down you feel with them/author.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm with you on this one.

As long as everyone is buying from the marketplace and not bloomin well ripping apps and side loading them, Microsoft will be happy, but alas with all things people feel the need to steal from others, Android is rife with piracy...
So I would imagine Microsoft would be very pleased with HD running WP7 and activating the Live services as they can get more revenue from the marketplace without having to support our devices in anyway.
JUST BUY SOME APPS people and we will be OK.
People always seems to immediately think just because you have cracked or hacked a device it means you are a pirate, this is not true

Tards at pocketnow grrr haters! Thats what they are!
Hmm they always been apple fanboyz, but this is it!
A little sidenote, if microsoft locks us out, I'll never ever buy a phone from them again. Customers will drop like flies, let's sit this one out.

One of the only results of the article is that more people will know about being able to flash the WP7 ROM on their HD2s. Microsoft was of course aware of the ROM and why the number of people asking for keys for WP7s increased. Microsoft surely had formulated their responses and policies on the situation long before pocketnow.com contacted them.
The only other result is more people can see what kind of outfit that site is.
Most likely this will have little effect on using the ROM or obtaining keys.

Yeah, I saw that article earlier. Was surprised they would press the issue, but you know journalists, they generally have no conscience, all they want is a story. Won't be supporting or recommending pocketnow from now on.

Think as a Microfoft guy. Some retards come and ask you if you are OK that your services are being hacked. Of course you will not say that you are OK with this. It's a completely different question if you will do something about it.
Although the term "hacking" is completely wrong here. We all have legitimate WP7 keys issued by MS. He have hacked NOTHING to get Live access. Some ppl even said honestly they have a HD2. The MS representative that gave me the key never asked me about my device btw.
Just see the matter from MS point of view: YOu have 10 000 or so Windows Mobile customers that have found a way to flash WP7 to their devices. Unfortunately for you these folks can also flash Android to their devices. What would you do? Shut them down and send them to Google?

rlydiard said:
One of the only results of the article is that more people will know about being able to flash the WP7 ROM on their HD2s. Microsoft was of course aware of the ROM and why the number of people asking for keys for WP7s increased. Microsoft surely had formulated their responses and policies on the situation long before pocketnow.com contacted them.
The only other result is more people can see what kind of outfit that site is.
Most likely this will have little effect on using the ROM or obtaining keys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pocketnow already has tons of articles telling people that HD2 has got WP7 now.
What they did by this article was just to get Microsoft to look into a matter which they were most likely deliberately ignoring!
Am totally disappointed by Pocketnow!

Tanmay® said:
Pocketnow already has tons of articles telling people that HD2 has got WP7 now.
What they did by this article was just to get Microsoft to look into a matter which they were most likely deliberately ignoring!
Am totally disappointed by Pocketnow!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I am quite aware of the articles that pocketnow.com has put online about HD2s running WP7. Partly because of those articles, and because Microsoft does indeed monitor XDA-Developer posts, they were indeed aware of the port since the beginning, and they certainly were aware of why so many people have been trying to obtain keys.
I doubt that Microsoft was deliberately ignoring the situation, but had already formulated their policies. And, as another poster pointed out, how do you expect Microsoft to respond when asked by a publication about the situation?
Microsoft could have come out with a much tougher statement, but they did not, so I still maintain that the situation for those who use WP7 ROMS on the HD2s will not drastically change, and that Microsoft will not make a sudden change of course here.

MS were already looking into this. You don't get to be the biggest software company by not knowing what is going on with your business.
Everyone should just relax. I've had a few friends who have told MS that they are running WP7 on HD2 and they need an activation code. MS gave them one, no questions asked.
If MS wanted to stop us using WP7 then they would have blocked ALL services by now. The HD2 is such a small share of their market, do you think they care? Not really. More exposure for them and their OS.
Personally, I don't really care either way. It would cost MS a few bucks to actively exclude certain phones. It isn't worth their time or effort. WP7 is a new OS. Why would they want to limit exposure?
Pocketnow are in it for the money. Any news is GOOD news.....

For all the people saying that they are disappointed by PN.COM,
Here is the response from the writer:
Anton D. Nagy said:
"@Adam Bentley, @luke Flex
Thanks for the kind words!
I get it you're neither a developer with software in the Marketplace nor songwriter/artist/or part of a band with its Music up on Zune. I understand you're not even part of an OEM or carrier that builds or sells smartphones or communication services and I think you’re not part of the team that made Windows Phone 7 possible. Simply put, I don't think you're someone who earns anything from the activities above. Should I wish you that your work, whatever it is that you do, would end up hacked/plagiarized the same way someday? No, I will not!
If you think that Anton, or even pocketnow.com for that matter, can do anything to influence a company like Microsoft, you're a fool! If you think that Anton, or even pocketnow.com for that matter, brought Microsoft the terrible news that its platform and services got hacked, you're a fool again!
What I'm saying here -- and this will be in no way considered pocketnow.com’s position -- is that I don't really care about the opinions of readers like you! Not because of the "screw you" part because we're professionals, but because the words that express your inappropriate thoughts, because of the mentality. You think you deserve to have something just because it simply can be achieved or because you own an HTC HD2? You disrespect the thousands who’ve worked hard for software that runs on hardware designed and manufactured by other thousands. You disrespect your fellow community members who have legitimately bought Windows Phone 7 software running on Windows Phone 7 hardware. Last but not least, you disrespect other pocketnow.com readers that might agree with the things I said above."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

To my mind, this answer is just a kind of hypocrisy, bc I don't think Microsoft would be angry if some thousands of users would buy applications from the market, or even if some HD2 users would develop some apps (Microsoft claims that developers are needed and welcome).
In addition, remember that a lot of us (and me in particular) have bought HD2 only because it was the first phone that would have an update to WP7...
To my mind, it's just fair for us to have a port, even hacked, to WP7 !

kawazaki said:
For all the people saying that they are disappointed by PN.COM,
Here is the response from the writer:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tool obviously doesn't realise the 'hack' does not allow carte blanch access to any Marketplace software, but only to free apps.
Poor journalism. But I'm sure Anton/PN is going to get a few extra hits out of this.

the only ones who will benefit from it are pocketnow.com, obviously.
I suggest we don't give them the attention they so loudely cry for, because they will bring XDA down. They disrespect developers, not vice versa.

Whatever goes on, I don´t care at all.
Yes, I indeed was hoping that WP7 would be ported for our HD2. Unfortunately, MS and HTC both missed the chance to offer this upgrade officially. Just try to imagine if they would have done this: There is a big chance that some longtime WinMo users would move over to the new platform - just thanks to a trial possibility.
The thing is: I think 80% of all HD2 owners don´t flash their devices. Imagine the possible boost for WP7 if all those were offered to upgrade officially. Great customer satisfaction generates positive mouth-to-mouth advertising.
If they start to fight the "hack", I believe the opposite will happen: More former "core" WinMo "power users" than before will move on to Android and iOS, the first is more "open" and the second is nicely jailbroken, both offering a massive number of apps. The result for MS is not only negative mouth-to-mouth advertising (the worst scenario a company can suffer), but also loss of ROI since less potential users buy stuff from marketplace, less potential users decide to use paid "Live" services (such as XBox Gold membership, let alone maybe even new potential buyers of that gaming platform), etc.
MS could simply decide to stop giving codes for "unsupported" hardware. Then again, HD2 is so close to HD7 that they might consider this device as "compatible". If they are even more clever, they could offer a trial, just as many app providers do in the marketplace. I would actually be willing to pay a couple of bucks if I would decide to keep WP7 - which is not the fact as of today, mainly because the OS isn´t ready yet imho.

Samsung Galaxy S I9000 Service Problem

I promised myself show how Samsung treats its and how they assume responsibilities.
More here:
Samsung Galaxy S I9000 blog
Samsung Galaxy S I9000 Facebook Page
The main ideea is that i am a lucky owner of a phone that comes from a batch that was released on the market with manufacturing errors.
Other owner with same problem found out:
Finally they(samsung) informed us that the display needs to be replaced. This means the front panel in totality will be replaced. I hope to get it back in a couple
of days. The way they were handling the phone i am worried if i will get it back in acceptable condition. It has been a really traumatic experience. They informed me it was a manufacturing defect and there seems to be a batch which might have this issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After x time the displays of these phones coming from that batch lose color depth and increase brightness, the overall image quality being shattered to pieces.
To be shure my phone had this particular problem, i tried everything from the software point of view that could be done : changed to stock android, tried different custom roms, even the ones with voodoo color fixes, factory reset (of course) but nothing.
I was shure then i had that problem as the owner above and i brought it to service (i just bought the phone in november 2010). I did not know i had to put the original android from samsung, so i got a phone call the next day from samsung service, being told that i voided my warranty and i should pay 350 dolars to fix it.
I understand that rules are rules and that it says that if you use other than original samsung software you void the warranty, but they know, and i know that this is a production fault having NOTHING to do with the software .
The main ideea is the phone comes from a batch with manufacturing defects and they SHOULD asume responsability.
Don`t get me wrong, i loved this phone and Android, but the way samsung deals with this problem is outrageous and i must "be heard" .
I hope your phones do not come from that batch.
Thank you & happy flasing,
Dan Gheorghe

bbluee:
You wrote that You have master degree in computer science
BUT IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING...
were were you living last years?
you were smart enough to flash new firmware but you failed with ensuring your own security and comfort as a common customer, poor you
I can bet that almost everybody on xda do know that before sending broken device (ANY device!!!) to ANY service the most secure way is to ensure it has system and enhancements oficially supported by manufacturer.
Greetings!
V.

voriax said:
bbluee:
You wrote that You have master degree in computer science
BUT IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING...
were were you living last years?
you were smart enough to flash new firmware but you failed with ensuring your own security and comfort as a common customer, poor you
I can bet that almost everybody on xda do know that before sending broken device (ANY device!!!) to ANY service the most secure way is to ensure it has system and enhancements oficially supported by manufacturer.
Greetings!
V.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know i did not have the "best" approach, and if any other given problem they could be right.
I did not want to brag with the degree, only to point out that i know i didn`t do anything to get the phone to have that display problem, and the fact that i know that the software in this case HAS NOTHING to do with the fact this product comes from a batch with manufacturing defects.
I know that here on xda, are people with far more android and phones knowledge than i have.

And you just gave up? This post looks like garbage to me.
"It is like i buy a laptop with windows 7 and i have a hardware problem , take it into service with a linux operating system and they say the warranty was voided." is NOTHING like modifying phone firmware. Samsung doesn't provide you with the tools to flash 3rd party firmware to your phone - if you used ODIN, you used STOLEN Samsung software.
Masters degree in computer science - lol, read the book, "overschooled but undereducated." When sending back a product for warranty service, you re-install all stock firmware; that's pretty basic knowledge.
Sounds like you're bad mouthing Samsung for something that is your fault. Personally, I wouldn't have taken it sitting down; they definitely should fix it, and making a stupid blog post to spout non-sense is just silly - demand they fix it, and know your rights under the law before you do.

phzi said:
And you just gave up? This post looks like garbage to me.
"It is like i buy a laptop with windows 7 and i have a hardware problem , take it into service with a linux operating system and they say the warranty was voided." is NOTHING like modifying phone firmware. Samsung doesn't provide you with the tools to flash 3rd party firmware to your phone - if you used ODIN, you used STOLEN Samsung software.
Masters degree in computer science - lol, read the book, "overschooled but undereducated." When sending back a product for warranty service, you re-install all stock firmware; that's pretty basic knowledge.
Sounds like you're bad mouthing Samsung for something that is your fault. Personally, I wouldn't have taken it sitting down; they definitely should fix it, and making a stupid blog post to spout non-sense is just silly - demand they fix it, and know your rights under the law before you do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, ok... Stop throwing rocks men ) . I said i know i have mistaken in not flashing the phone with the original firmware. Again i did not want to sound cocky in the first post.
Please excuse me if i did.
I just wanted to say i know that what i did, had nothing to do with the display problem.
Was it my fault i bought a product from a batch with manufacturing defects?
Thank you for your feedback.

"Allow me to root" Petition

Hi all!
I'll take it down if needed but I was wondering if such a petition is worth to do:
www(dot)change(dot)org/petitions/asustek-computers-open-nvflash-apx-and-allow-rooting-of-tablet (hmmm, still can't post links, oh well)
As said, there's been work done, but it could actually bring some fresh air to everyone if ASUS decided to get their butts off of the seat and stop the lock&run game because people will get exhausted.
Plus I honestly believe that the more they lock it, the more they're gonna cut themselves from the non-ignorable proportion of people who want at least the freedom to be able to tweak things.
After all, you can do it with almost everything around, even in high-tech.
(tw.asus.com is hard to reach and asus.com is ooo, If anyone have a good email address to submit for the petitioners, I'll take it )
Any thoughts? (or any mistakes on the petition to point out? English not being my native language)
Thx

I don't think this would be very successful. Asus has both a right and a reason not to allow root access. For one, you always have those knuckleheads out there who would love to try and overclock their processor to 6Ghz just to see if they can do it and then they would expect Asus to provide warranty coverage. Not to mention those who brick their device, etc.
There may also be other issues we don't even know about. Perhaps Netflix and other DRM or secure based apps would claim this is a violation of their agreements and pull support which, in the long run, isn't worth it for Asus because only a small minority of people do things like rooting, etc.
Anyway, as much as I like to have root and cool ROMs like Cyanogen, I wouldn't sign this petition even if I thought it would go somewhere. I just feel that, in the end, it would raise the price of the product so they could cover those people mentioned in paragraph 1.

I totally get your points.
This is why it can be proposed, as HTC does, on the counterpart of losing part or all of warranty coverage for misuse.
I didn't think of DRM support initially as the services mentioned aren't available out of the US anyways, but still, does HTC have such a partnership? (They do mention the potential loss of DRM protected content access)...
But you're right at the same time, I just feel trapped with a TF101G/B80 which I'd just like a few extra functionality that many others are playing with *shrugs* I still do believe that opening the device a bit more can help it's success, but maybe that's me being naive.

Can't say I worry about the 6Ghz OC type of problem domain, because if someone does that and expects warrety coverage they obviously have larger problems for our culture. I'd also say it's fair to just write in the warentee, "VOID IF ROOTED OR TAMPERED WITH", and adapt the definitions in legalise or simple English suitably. And then point to that when someone does something stupid: You seriously voided your warentee pal.
What is a serious issue to think about is issues like the Netflix example. That is one that could have many and far reaching implecations, both for the device and the platform if it becomes the norm. It's also sth I have never thought about. Perhaps because of how I view the whole DRM thing.
e.g. you can't let me play your game on my PC *and* stop my neighbore from pirating it, unless you can pretty much reduce it to a video stream with some interactivity instead of how contemporary games are done. It can be made harder but in the end, DRM can't provide the level of protection companies want.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

Spidey01 said:
Can't say I worry about the 6Ghz OC type of problem domain, because if someone does that and expects warrety coverage they obviously have larger problems for our culture. I'd also say it's fair to just write in the warentee, "VOID IF ROOTED OR TAMPERED WITH", and adapt the definitions in legalise or simple English suitably. And then point to that when someone does something stupid: You seriously voided your warentee pal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's just it. It's not always possible for asus to tell if someone has tampered or rooted their device. This is the age of electronics. Tracks can very easily be covered. The knucklehead who tried to OC to 6ghz is probably also clever enough to cover his tracks and claims it just stopped working one day. The only way for asus to tell if the thing's been tampered with is if they spend the time, money, and resources to investigate, which in the end isn't even worth it.
In this case, I agree with Asus. I rooted mine from day one and has been doing some tweakings under the hood the last few months. That said, I don't think most people out there are up to it.

Taking it down.
Mixed feeling... I understand (though not agree with all) the mentionned points.
They could do it if they wanted.
And I doubt HTC raised the prices of their devices in allowing people to root it (and they cover their asses anyways, on repair coverage and loss of DRM's to avoid having to)
I'm simply gonna tag ASUS as being a bit lame, my only hope is some advancements on the SBK crackdown.
[Hint for NVidia: add a (false-positive proof) read-only max-temp-reached register accessible through APX, could help putting away some OC misuse]

I don't understand. Windows laptops are "rootable" and no one does any fuss about it. Why Transformer isn't? I won't buy another Asus tablet if I can't root it or change the OS if I want - I will look for other options (like HTC with their N-trig stylus). If they worry about OC they should state that rooting voids warranty. But I think the main problem for them is DRM which I don't even want on my device - if they made the device rootable probably Netflix and others would oppose it or sth (I don't know why - it's working on rooted device right now anyway).