Hey,
I have really been wanting to root my Galaxy-S8, and the only computer I have available to me currently is a Acer Chromebook. I've been doing a little research on the subject, and it doesn't seem like there's a lot of info on the topic - is that a sign I'm wasting my time?
Really curious if this is possible...
hammer280 said:
Hey,
I have really been wanting to root my Galaxy-S8, and the only computer I have available to me currently is a Acer Chromebook. I've been doing a little research on the subject, and it doesn't seem like there's a lot of info on the topic - is that a sign I'm wasting my time?
Really curious if this is possible...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Root is only achievable on a nougat system Oreo and pie nope. I don't know if it's possible from a chrome book most of the rooting tools are based for windows. But jrkruse safestrap rev 5. Is the way
TheMadScientist said:
Root is only achievable on a nougat system Oreo and pie nope. I don't know if it's possible from a chrome book most of the rooting tools are based for windows. But jrkruse safestrap rev 5. Is the way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uhmm...
Actually, I'm afraid that's incorrect. I understand this post was from 2019, but Chromebooks have never been able to use Windows packages and programs. Their OS is Chrome OS, which is basically android but with an enhanced chrome browsing experience. And everyone knows that Android is solely Linux based,... as android uses the linux kernel. You see, Linux is open source, right?... therefore, using the Linux kernels, the android developers were able to implement the various modifications that fit their needs.
Now, the Chromebooks, have actually brought even more Linux computing to the table. First off, they have a full fledged Linux distro in beta, that you can enable... Actually even without enabling the linux beta, Chromebooks all have access to the developer shell. As well as Chrome's very own "Crosh" terminal. Both of which are operable using linux commands. (Not windows)
And on just another note...
Google, over the past few years, actually has been working on a new Chrome browser. And by "past few years", I mean even at the time off this original post, up untill now, they've continuously been working on this thing. Lol Yes, I know... Incredible isn't it? Lol Any way, even though it is still currently being worked on Chromebook users now have access to this new brower, via enabling it through turning on a few flags in "Chrome://flags". So the main idea for this browser is actually to decouple the browser from the OS, giving the new Chrome Web browser, much more of a separation. (Which I'm definitely in favour of, and is far less confusing lol). So this new browser, has yet to actually be "officially named" (probably will just stay as "Chrome")... But for now, the developers have made it identifiable to us users, and have been referring to it as "LaCrOS". So, I just want to point out, that the name "LaCrOS" is actually derived from both the words "Linux" and "Chrome OS".
One thing, maybe is what you were thinking of, is that some Chromebooks (like my own) use the amd x86 processors, instead of Arm64, which is the same processors that you'd find in any windows computer (that is aside from, well... now Apple lol) But even though The Chromebooks that use x86 processing offer more of a powerful performance (as well as a powerful consumption of battery & memory) they still very much are Linux based machines... And are VERY VERY different than a windows computer. In order to run any Windows program or package on a Chromebook, you'd need some type of emulator allowing you to do so. Chromebooks, alike Androids, without use of an emulator, are only able to read, install, and run .apk files and not a windows .exe file.
Gorvetco said:
Uhmm...
Actually, I'm afraid that's incorrect. I understand this post was from 2019, but Chromebooks have never been able to use Windows packages and programs. Their OS is Chrome OS, which is basically android but with an enhanced chrome browsing experience. And everyone knows that Android is solely Linux based,... as android uses the linux kernel. You see, Linux is open source, right?... therefore, using the Linux kernels, the android developers were able to implement the various modifications that fit their needs.
Now, the Chromebooks, have actually brought even more Linux computing to the table. First off, they have a full fledged Linux distro in beta, that you can enable... Actually even without enabling the linux beta, Chromebooks all have access to the developer shell. As well as Chrome's very own "Crosh" terminal. Both of which are operable using linux commands. (Not windows)
And on just another note...
Google, over the past few years, actually has been working on a new Chrome browser. And by "past few years", I mean even at the time off this original post, up untill now, they've continuously been working on this thing. Lol Yes, I know... Incredible isn't it? Lol Any way, even though it is still currently being worked on Chromebook users now have access to this new brower, via enabling it through turning on a few flags in "Chrome://flags". So the main idea for this browser is actually to decouple the browser from the OS, giving the new Chrome Web browser, much more of a separation. (Which I'm definitely in favour of, and is far less confusing lol). So this new browser, has yet to actually be "officially named" (probably will just stay as "Chrome")... But for now, the developers have made it identifiable to us users, and have been referring to it as "LaCrOS". So, I just want to point out, that the name "LaCrOS" is actually derived from both the words "Linux" and "Chrome OS".
One thing, maybe is what you were thinking of, is that some Chromebooks (like my own) use the amd x86 processors, instead of Arm64, which is the same processors that you'd find in any windows computer (that is aside from, well... now Apple lol) But even though The Chromebooks that use x86 processing offer more of a powerful performance (as well as a powerful consumption of battery & memory) they still very much are Linux based machines... And are VERY VERY different than a windows computer. In order to run any Windows program or package on a Chromebook, you'd need some type of emulator allowing you to do so. Chromebooks, alike Androids, without use of an emulator, are only able to read, install, and run .apk files and not a windows .exe file.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm. As I stated years ago. I didn't know. I didn't say yes.
We didn't need a long drawn out explanation of a chrome book. And so you know. I've had a hp windows laptop that I've swapped back and forth between windows and chrome os. For my kid.
Your post is completely irrelevant. As it is so old of a topic. Either way the methods for these devices are completely depreciated.
I am one of the people who helped out on these devices with heavy testing. Plus much much more.
By you telling me I was incorrect just shows that you are acting like a pompous know it all and trying to prove me wrong where I specifically said I didn't know. How does me saying I don't know make me incorrect?
On a side note. We here at xda don't much care to drag up old deals topics that have long since been gone and irrelevant.
Clutters the pages with old useless information
It wasn't irrelevant. I disagree.
Furthermore, the original question was regarding Chromebooks specifically, and not Chrome OS. So my apologies, but shouldn't even the oldest of threads be contemporized if the new information or tools now available have changed since then? But as I did mention, this was not the point of what I wanted to make clear.
I did not say anything regarding the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of utilizing a Chromebook to obtain root on an seperate android device. Nor did I state that you were incorrect. I'm well aware, that it would be ignorant and frankly just unfair to disparage you based on the knowledge available at the given point in time. However, it's unfortunate that you felt obligated to retaliate in such a manner, as It was very clear of what my actual intensions here were, and that it was not in any way a means to belittle you.
There is something you may just have me on though. For in the sense that I guess I am unsure of the protocol here at XDA. But I still do not feel that attacking me was the right way to go about your response. You see, I'm a member at both GitHub, and Stack exchange. So I guess I just assumed that because there is plenty of room for misinterpretation, and at times even errors, so honestly, some of the best ways to further our understanding is when we converse and can learn from one another. In any case, I had noticed that your comment could very easily be misinterpreted, and not everyone is on the same advanced level as you might be. So its best to not just assume, but actually it is encourage to give your answers as if you may be explaining to someone who isn't familiar with the subject at all, and using examples and explaining as clearly as possible are excellent way to do this, and usually can be most appreciated.
As for trying to prove you wrong, I do then appologize, as that was not my intentions. I only wished for it to be acknowledged, that a Chromebook, regardless of the year, then and now, in no way has the ability to utilise any Windows rooting tool. I did not state this to offend any one. It was only to contribute a very descriptive and detailed body of information, ensuring that the difference between windows executable files and that of Androids are to be both known and understood, to avoid anyone's time being wasted on a task or and idea that would get them nowhere.
It is necessary to do this, as for the chance an unknowingly individual may come across this thread, looking for answers similar to the question at hand. As you should know, even "old topics" should be rectified as such. Unless in the event they are to be removed, locked or relocated to a more appropriate forum.
The only thing here I believe to be irrelevant, is that you felt inclined to point out what I had already stated and took into consideration. So again, that way it is clear, I would just like to point out... that regardless of the year, whether it be 4 years ago, 4 months ago, or whether it be today. I amend the information I provided, and consider it to not only be "relevant" but I hope it proves to be useful and potential prevent or deter someone who would have been then proceeding to inquire about how to run "Windows rooting tools" on a chromebook.
Related
Hey Guys
The beta of blue stacks in now available. Now u can run Android app on windows Downloading on CP now. Will post later how it is
I would not install it, caused me to get bluescreens after reboot
I have just installed it, played angry bird space and it works fine for me.
1/2asleep said:
I have just installed it, played angry bird space and it works fine for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On Windows 8?
I can't get BlueStacks to run in Windows 8 at all. Every time I run the installer I get a blue screen with a frown face saying that something went wrong and Windows needs to restart. I have been testing the private beta build on Windows 7 though and it is definitely fun and useful
After Few blue screen restarts it worked. Uninstalled it because it not what i expected to be. I cant run any app in full screen. I run in only a portion and i cant use gmail and angry birds because of some high performance driver issue. The alpha version before this was better.
At the moment, this is so bad
Thanks for the heads up! Going to try this.
I really wanted to try it on my Windows 8 netbook but the Thinstaller executable they gave me refused to install because my it claimed my graphics performance would be under the minimum recommended requirement. It was rather sad since the Alpha worked fine and even running the same version of Android they base their rootfs images off of (Android-x86) as a addition to my Linux dual-boot.
buggatti said:
After Few blue screen restarts it worked. Uninstalled it because it not what i expected to be. I cant run any app in full screen. I run in only a portion and i cant use gmail and angry birds because of some high performance driver issue. The alpha version before this was better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows 8? I tried as many as 8 blue screen restarts so far. No luck. Still keeps crashing my system into the BSOD. Did alpha work on Windows 8 CP x64?
I was part of the closed beta 1 test and have been in email communication with Bluestacks development and they informed me that they do not have a beta ready for Windows 8 because it is still changing. It sounds like the focus is on Windows 7 for now.
Pls provide download links.....
Sent from my Dell Streak using XDA
nitin1978 said:
Pls provide download links.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://bluestacks.com/
nobody wants this cancer on their computers
Be on the lookout for this (when or if) it comes out
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-33377_1-57355786/bluestacks-goes-metro-with-windows-8/
o2neouzr said:
nobody wants this cancer on their computers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, Bluestacks should be avoided. They have no support forums (personal top gripe) and have made it quite clear they plan to try to make a quick buck leveraging VirtualBox and Android x86 while not giving anything back.
As best I can tell, they have just added an OpenGL pass through driver to Android x86 when running on VB as well as started to recompile some apps which use the ARM NDK to the x86 NDK. Far better to have the Android x86 community work on an automated NDK conversion and their own driver implementation than be shackled.
Also, their TOS lets them abuse your facebook page in new and interesting ways as well as do some serious data mining without any form of opt-out or transparency.
There are support forums:
https://getsatisfaction.com/bstk
BlueStacks even went as far as supplying a link on how to root and install gapps. I wouldn't say there is a lack of support. BlueStacks in my opinion also runs faster than x86 on a virtual machine.
aaronb1138 said:
Indeed, Bluestacks should be avoided. They have no support forums (personal top gripe) and have made it quite clear they plan to try to make a quick buck leveraging VirtualBox and Android x86 while not giving anything back.
As best I can tell, they have just added an OpenGL pass through driver to Android x86 when running on VB as well as started to recompile some apps which use the ARM NDK to the x86 NDK. Far better to have the Android x86 community work on an automated NDK conversion and their own driver implementation than be shackled.
Also, their TOS lets them abuse your facebook page in new and interesting ways as well as do some serious data mining without any form of opt-out or transparency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Virtualbox and android are licensed under GPLv2/CDDL and apache respectively. Android specifically is exactly the same as stock device roms, they're under no obilgation to return code to upstream. (though every large project like this should return code, but bar the kernel they dont have to for the android portion).
virtualbox, i'm guessing they're using CDDL for it if they're not returning code.
Tell oracle (or whoever is developing it) and the android x86 teams to not release their sources under free software licenses that arnt also copyleft then.
At least with androidx86 I believe that they're free to migrate from apache -> gplv3 (according to wikipedia I dont believe gplv2 is applicable without relicensing?). But they didnt, they're still apache, which means they full well know that they can be forked and not have code returned.
Those two points are pretty much universally expected for android devices. Samsung and HTC are good enough that they provide mode then the minimal GPL modules, but they're closer to the exception then the norm. There's plenty of very low end (but inexpensive) ICS tabs being hawked on our own market. I cant really see them giving more then the bare minimum (even if that) much less providing any updates at all. They're just as much making a quick buck by only offering updates by buying a new model.
They've havnt required facebook since 0.5.0.2002, which I believe was their first public release. It was merely the cloud client that required it. You can easily use the alphas and betas without even having a facebook acct. I cant speak on how they are about people that actually opt-ed in to attachign their FB accts, but I dont have one period.
Perhaps their cloud sync isnt respecting your privacy as it should, because you right about that part. Bstacks doesnt have a clear privacy policy (or any at all on their site currently)
They're not the only ones using getsatisfaction, which acts as their support point. I cant say that I like it, but it's there. They've added a couple suggestions due to it, but it's not a forum.
Realistically, how long do you have to wait for androidx86 to be bundled in a way that lets you run it in a vm, have fair virtualization/emulation, and is stable? (though bstacks is still beta, and androidx86 is 'rc1') Androidx86 is targeting bare metal, bstacks isnt. Perhaps androidx86 actually runs perfectly well under a vm and also supports some level of hardware passthough too. Their site has instructions for using the eeepc froyo iso on virtualbox. But they obviously dont officially support virtualbox or qemu as they dont provide direct images, they merely happen to work/boot on them.
Androidx86 has 5 different isos targeting 5 different platforms, and none of them match my devices (or any of my vms explicitly). Bstacks explicitly supports vista/7 and implicitly is going to support xp/8 in the future.
I'd much rather have something working now that targets my interests then wait for something that might be more sustainable but isnt targeting me.
It's much like how xda has moto droid forums, really you shouldnt be supporting moto at least when it comes to their locked down bootloaders.
But we're not telling people to buy a different device, we give them workarounds and guides.
Finally, all bstacks is is just an opengl passthough, why has noone else done it already?
I dont expect that androidx86 on virtualbox integrates as well otherwise it'd already be huge news.
I want a virtualized android so my convertable laptop can double as a really high end android tablet, and that's what bstacks will eventually offer.
(if and when they migrate from 2.3.4 to 4.0.x)
If there's any errors, feel free to correct me. I'm rather unsure about how correct I am on the virtualbox parts.
Edit: after trying androidx86 2.3/3.2/4.0 it's fairly useless as a android tablet replacement. They dont support VM integration, and that's pretty much a requirement if you intend to use it to compliment your OS (vs merely being a utility on your os).
4.0 doesnt even work on vb with vb 4.1.8, it cant reach the home screen.
Dont take this as criticism of androidx86 though, they're always going to be undermanned and underfunded. And like previously mentioned VB isnt even a tier 1 target for them.
But realistically, there's no current alternative to bstacks for windows. Seriously suggesting androidx86 + virtualbox right now is like saying to trade for a transformer to someone asking how to install CM9 on the touchpad
moved to general - not dev
Hello guys,
I'm glad to write the first post in this section.
We've all seen the Microsoft Windows Phone Summit this morning (evening) and had to notice, that they've focused on an "Complete Security Platform". Due to their "Enterprise Ready - Fundamentals", they implemented a Secure Boot and Bitlocker Encryption.
This will be very good for all of you, who are depending on a phone, that doesen't share all it's data if it's getting stolen etc.. But those of you, who built application for customization or any further experience, will get stuck.
I'd really like to discuss these news with you.
(Is the microSD support a hint for a sideloading possibility?)
It has already been hard from an interop to a full unlock for the existing devices. The Lumia 900 is up to now unaccessible...
Will this be a disadvantage in comparison to the Android strategy?
All comments are welcome!!!
Titus
This is still all brand new, so I imagine later that someone will be provided with a prototype of some sort and may be able to answer those questions? I think we should start a donation for the pioneers of homebrew on WP so we can get something good done =)
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Some pages state that there will be sideloading capabilities. I don't see those happen unless Microsoft is pretty sure that those can't be used to deploy Warez. Also companies will be able to deploy their own software so there has to be an alternate way to deploy software aside from the Marketplace.
But an official side load option would amount to pretty much the same as a current Developer unlock and deeper going functionality as what is provided by Interop/Full-Unlocks won't be available that way.
It is going to be interesting to get around those as the NT Kernel is likely to be a harder nut to crack than whatever Microsoft threw together on top of CE6 for WP7.
StevieBallz said:
Some pages state that there will be sideloading capabilities. I don't see those happen unless Microsoft is pretty sure that those can't be used to deploy Warez. Also companies will be able to deploy their own software so there has to be an alternate way to deploy software aside from the Marketplace.
But an official side load option would amount to pretty much the same as a current Developer unlock and deeper going functionality as what is provided by Interop/Full-Unlocks won't be available that way.
It is going to be interesting to get around those as the NT Kernel is likely to be a harder nut to crack than whatever Microsoft threw together on top of CE6 for WP7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. It will be difficult to break and it may take some time, but good thing we have some awesome people that are devoted to making it happen
hack is possible
I think were looking at this from the wrong perspective. The App developers for Windows 8 Metro will be key in the implementation of hacking the Windows 8 phone. As Microsoft stated, this phone 8 will work harmoniously with 8 metro.
Windows 8 Metro is comprised of at least 80% HTML5 coded APPS. HTML5 has huge advantages that have been exploited before in the past.
So, If Windows phone 8 is comprised of similar HTML5 code. I'm sure developers will be able to comprise a boot hack to enable sideloading.
:good:
Shaggykjb said:
I think were looking at this from the wrong perspective. The App developers for Windows 8 Metro will be key in the implementation of hacking the Windows 8 phone. As Microsoft stated, this phone 8 will work harmoniously with 8 metro.
Windows 8 Metro is comprised of at least 80% HTML5 coded APPS. HTML5 has huge advantages that have been exploited before in the past.
So, If Windows phone 8 is comprised of similar HTML5 code. I'm sure developers will be able to comprise a boot hack to enable sideloading.
:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't say a boot hack could be seen anytime soon due to bitlocker and secure boot.
Have you seen any exploits on the current Windows 8 through HTML5? Since Microsoft's implementations of ANYTHING are always different (Even when they say it is compliant), I would imagine that the HTML5 on W8 won't have the same exploits. I'm thinking it will be quite difficult, but I wouldn't say impossible. That's why I think we need the current WP7 hackers or even the Android hackers in on this... The ones that know and understand the low-level aspects of x86 and ARM to be able to know what is going on behind the scenes and try to get around it. Given that a good bit of the second gen windows phones still aren't able to be interop-unlocked and sideloaded, I am sure Microsoft has patched the ways those backdoors in w8 and wp8.
As so much Malware was installed through IE previously Microsoft did a great deal of work to harden it against Exploits. But furthermore it would only be the first step to find a vulnerability in the browser or an HTML5-App.
IE itself is run in it's own OS compartment which runs below regular user rights. So if code gets run in the Browser context it effectively can't do very much. This is one of the reasons why desktop exploits started to rely more heavily on Flash and Adobe Reader Bugs (those plugins ran on user privileges).
The HTML5-Apps are most likely to execute in the least priviledged chamber separated from each other very much alike to the way WP7s Silverlight Apps are isolated from each other.
Given that I guess it will need people who understand the system architecture pretty well to crack it open. The easiest vector for getting Homebrew Apps on most likely is the LOB (Line of Business)-App support.
Even if you were to find an exploit, it's highly doubtful that it will give you anything. WP8 is with UEFI Secure Boot something entirely new in that aspect, in that it's likely to see a full bottom-up chain of trust. You'd likely need to break UEFI itself to get any binaries persistently with elevated privileges. If the UEFI firmware is not upgradable on the device (for instanced burned on the chip) the protection is unlike for current phones theoretically perfect.
Of course, it remains to be seen in what extend WP8 will validate signatures, but if say any elevated code needs signing, then a permanent full/root unlock is very unlikely to achieve.
Hard SPL unlocks as they're seen with the Titan and Radar will also be a matter of the past with WP8.
TitusO said:
Hello guys,
I'm glad to write the first post in this section.
We've all seen the Microsoft Windows Phone Summit this morning (evening) and had to notice, that they've focused on an "Complete Security Platform". Due to their "Enterprise Ready - Fundamentals", they implemented a Secure Boot and Bitlocker Encryption.
This will be very good for all of you, who are depending on a phone, that doesen't share all it's data if it's getting stolen etc.. But those of you, who built application for customization or any further experience, will get stuck.
I'd really like to discuss these news with you.
(Is the microSD support a hint for a sideloading possibility?)
It has already been hard from an interop to a full unlock for the existing devices. The Lumia 900 is up to now unaccessible...
Will this be a disadvantage in comparison to the Android strategy?
All comments are welcome!!!
Titus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think if memory card access and file access as in symbian and android is available in windows 8 then we can sideload apps if not its impossible as inh lumia 900
vickylance said:
i think if memory card access and file access as in symbian and android is available in windows 8 then we can sideload apps if not its impossible as inh lumia 900
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have removable SD card support and can install applications to it. However, Microsoft stated that sideloading is only available for enterprises for a (nominal) fee. Meaning, it's highly likely that the phone will check signatures on all applications, including those on the SD card and you won't be able to run them otherwise. (actually WP7 does this already - if your devel unlock expires and the phone relocks, all unsigned apps will not run anymore)
ZetaZynK said:
However, Microsoft stated that sideloading is only available for enterprises for a (nominal) fee.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you got any source for Microsoft anouncing a fee per device to allow this. To my knowledge not much is yet announced in that regard. We know that there will be a cloud based solution for Management/Deployment (most likely inTune) and an on premise one.
According to CNet Asia a Microsoft Employee during Technet told them that SD-Card installation meant installation from SD-Card instead of App-Installation to the SD-Card (see here: http://asia.cnet.com/apps-cannot-be-installed-to-microsd-cards-on-wp8-62217133.htm)
The latest rumor is that WP8 will include TPM chips on all handsets. Thus will drive added hardware security to the firmware. I am feeling very skeptical that WP8 will be rootable as a result. I have a TPM system in my Win 8 laptop and it is damned secure.
Sent from my Kindle Fire running ICS
StevieBallz said:
Have you got any source for Microsoft anouncing a fee per device to allow this. To my knowledge not much is yet announced in that regard. We know that there will be a cloud based solution for Management/Deployment (most likely inTune) and an on premise one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hm, I believed I had read this, but seems you're correct. Not sure where I believed to have done so right now.
kenikh said:
The latest rumor is that WP8 will include TPM chips on all handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TPM is not the problem here - secure boot is. Considering Microsoft announced secure boot as part of the WP8 announcement, it's kind of likely that all devices will ship it.
Secure boot and a TPM both can deliver a trusted boot path, but with significant differences in the execution. With a TPM you store a key and Platform Context Registers (PCRs) on the module - if the PCRs mismatch then some part of the configuration was altered which is likely indicating a breach of trust in the boot path. With Secure Boot, one or more vendor generated keys (and not a self-generated one, like on a TPM)are stored in the system's firmware. If the boot loader is not signed by one of those keys, the device refuses to boot. This means that you can't replace the boot loader with custom code (as you do with for instance a HSPL). In a TPM-based scenario, the user can re-assign TPM ownership, Secure Boot has no such concept.
Note: x86 PCs will come with Secure Boot too, soon. However, MSFT requires ARM devices to have these keys assigned by the OEM and requires the manufacturer to allow changing the keys or disabling Secure Boot - for x86, they require the opposite, a PC without an option to add your own keys or to disable secure boot would fail the Windows 8 hardware certification.
If you come across the information again please let us know. There seems to be some confusion on the SD card topic (WinSuperSite reported differently).
As for secure boot and the TPM: if Microsoft decides to make CustomROMs hard the best course of action seems to emulate the "Enterprise Marketplace" given the assumption that those won't user Microsoft certificates but instead company certificates (which could be installed by the user similarily to the Exchange server certificates today). But we'll have to wait and see how that gets implemented in the end.
PS: Just found the following on Microsofts Windows Phone Developer Blog
LOB app deployment – Many enterprises understandably want to keep their line-of-business (LOB) apps in-house, controlling how they get published and deployed. In Windows Phone 8, we support several new channels for deploying LOB apps to enterprise devices, including installing from a website, SharePoint, or email.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds pretty much like sideloading might be a lot easier then we think it is.
Here is the problem with this... We're going to see DRM to the max. This has a chance of ruining the experience, just look at Apple recently. Also side-loading could be bad for the OS as look at Google with the possible Botnet + Trojans.
More importantly as a Dev, I fear more than anything, my code will be stolen, even if I Obfuscate the XAP. I rather my App be taken than my coding be compromised.
lseidman said:
Here is the problem with this... We're going to see DRM to the max. This has a chance of ruining the experience, just look at Apple recently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft ruins the experience for WP7s even more imho. There's really a lot of essential stuff that unlocked WP7s can do, but that stock WP7 is unable to do.
lseidman said:
Also side-loading could be bad for the OS as look at Google with the possible Botnet + Trojans.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This can be easily worked around: If they just made developer unlocks free (keeping the same deployment system as is), that would make it near to impossible for malware to spread.
lseidman said:
More importantly as a Dev, I fear more than anything, my code will be stolen, even if I Obfuscate the XAP. I rather my App be taken than my coding be compromised.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...and this is why I believe WP8 will have security measures against abuse of that private app deployment feature. Also, XAPs are not even badly protected right now.
Just for fun!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSnkWzZ7ZAA
He uses WP7 on 1:50
THE most informative thread on the WP8 section hands down....all u guys...BIG thanx for all the info...
Sent from my DROID RaZr.
This information is kind of making me question whether I really want to switch from Android to WP8. Anyone having used both android and WP8 want to share their thoughts? I know WP7/8 is closed similar to iOS but I think I'd like to atleast be able to sideload apps.
devize said:
This information is kind of making me question whether I really want to switch from Android to WP8. Anyone having used both android and WP8 want to share their thoughts? I know WP7/8 is closed similar to iOS but I think I'd like to atleast be able to sideload apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stick with Android. Windows phone will not be developer friendly. This is my biggest problem with windows phone. The whole works out of the box experience really doesn't work when the software is young and lacking basic functionality . There is barely anything you can do with wp7 right now and winp8 is supposed to be even more locked down
Sent from my T8788 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Hi some time ago when windows 8.1 was still called blue there were some rumours that Micro$oft will merge its two platforms. Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 would share she same Metro apps. This move should give M$ edge over Apple where you could have best of both worlds on single device. It seems now that this idea has been lost somewhere in 8.1 changelog.
So I was looking for revolution but it seems that we will receive just evolution. Oh and for most of the portals major change is the start button! Really?!
You seem to be suffering from some keyboard defect. I suggest you look into that. In the meantime, get back under your bridge.
Hi. Thank you for your reply. My post was to start a discussion about the features of new update and about lack of some expected ones (which maybe still will be announced).
And what was the purpose of your reply?
It was never said that wp8 and w8 would become one and the same. You have misunderstood. Some of the new windows runtime features are coming to windows phone and the services offered were to be merged, but the operating systems themselves were to remain seperate.
>Some of the new windows runtime features are coming to windows phone and the services offered were to be merged, but the operating systems themselves were to remain desperate.
that way I had to misunderstood this (would be a great idea thou). Sort of like universal apps shared between iphone and ipad) I seen few apps which are being announced as both windows 8 and windows phone 8 (check co-pilot or halo) which probably kept me in believing in this. Oh well we will see where windows 8 will evolve.
Andrew_j said:
that way I had to misunderstood this (would be a great idea thou). Sort of like universal apps shared between iphone and ipad) I seen few apps which are being announced as both windows 8 and windows phone 8 (check co-pilot or halo) which probably kept me in believing in this. Oh well we will see where windows 8 will evolve.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPhone and iPad share apps simply because they are the same operating system. The iPad is just a giant iPhone. its the same as how one android phone and another share apps, they are the same thing.
Windows phone and windows 8 are not.
The desperate thing I said above, may be true but autocorrect fail, wrote it from my nexus this morning.
Andrew_j said:
Hi. Thank you for your reply. My post was to start a discussion about the features of new update and about lack of some expected ones (which maybe still will be announced).
And what was the purpose of your reply?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Purpose of his post is that you stop using that $ instead of S.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Oh. I am sorry I didn't know that I hurt his / yours religious feelings.
Unless of course this gentleman refers to his home as "under the bridge" I read his post as simple attempt to offend.
In light of recent E3 news (xbox one- drm management, activation fees, price, Internet connection requirement to work, always-on camera pointing your face and listening all the time which you cannot just unplug) I thing that using $ instead of S is good way to comment the situation.
To end this pointless conversation - unless there there is a XDA rule which prohibits me to do so then please stop trolling and trying to offend other forum members.
Now coming back to 8.1 - is this correct what I understood from brief installation description that if you install this release you will have to reinstall all the programs if you would like to install final release?
"M$" and similar (and I'd apply this statement even to, for example, "$ony" which is a company I personally detest) is most commonly used as trolling behavior online. This is doubly true in a forum devoted to discussing Microsoft products. It's possible you had, and still have, a legit intention to create a meaningful discussion. However, it looked (and to an extent, still looks) like you're merely trying to stir up trouble.
I agree that the XbOne restrictions are nasty, but I have no intention of buying one, and this forum has nothing to do with that product.
The only hint I ever saw regarding merging the app models was a job posting about installing both XAP and APPX packages on the same platform. That's interesting, and does imply a merged app platform, but there's no guarantee it was even going to happen, much less when. To the best of my knowledge, Microsoft never officially said anything to the effect of "we will do this" although there's been rampant speculation since the Win8 beta days.
You are right. I has never been said officially thus my expectations and hopes to see any bits of confirmation during the press conference. When I haven seen any I asked the question here. Still must say I am looking forward this update (probably not for first public beta - if the rumours are true that you will have to reinstall all your applications).
Personally I believe that The Redmond company will need stronger impact to conquer more market right now windows 8 is getting the love it should receive as is being designed for touch but mostly is being use on non-touchscreen laptops and PC. Marked wasn't ready for this. So right approach would be IMO to get more tablet users on their side (look at the latest adverts windows 8 vs iPad). If 8" tablets market is good for win8 is another discussion thou.
But coming back to subject. Has this been confirm that win 8.1 final version cannot be I painless way installed on top of preview?
Cheers
In practice, it's pretty much always possible to do an in-place upgrade via tweaking a few files in the installer or a value in the registry. However, in-place upgrades are a bad enough idea even when they're supported; I really can't endorse doing it on your main system. I may well install the preview in a VM, though.
I think in this case I will rather wait for official final release. Hdd restrictions will not allow me to have more fun on vm. I am already running win8 on bootcamp so no more complications are required
Also partially as an answer to my initial question it has been announced that new halo game for win 8 and win phone 8 will not be a cross buy. These will be two independent apps so no one unified system for now at least.
Yeah, that's been the case for a number of games already. On the plus side, the games *can* still share data between platforms if you have it on boath, and you can earn achievemnts on both... which would matter more if I gave a damn about gamerscore (I've got like 3500, LOL) but some people really care.
Hi all. There is still light at the end of the tunnel (hope it's not a train
http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/...indows-phone-teams-in-titanic-microsoft-rejig
Ok, I want to start out by mentioning; some of you may or may not know about a project I've been working on since March 2013, the Android Desktop OS which is now in version 2.0.
Can test the interactive demo online here: http://invis.io/95IKINK4
I've been on this project by myself, putting together ideas and re-imagining how Android should be on a desktop. Now, I know that Android x86 does exist, so please don't announce that android on the pc has been done already, because it's not how I envision any of this.
I think also they have started this as a hobby with no real distinct intention, I started my idea to give Android a very bright future. I believe as well as many others who are excited for this project that Android could be massive on desktops.
Yes, I know that it is written with a Linux kernel and it is aimed for mobile, but my goal is to change that. I want it to be able to run all the apps from the Market Place in it's normal fashion without anything complicated, but I want the core of this, the heart of this to be written for Intel hardware for starters.
I know there are some guys wrote some Intel hardware code for android, but I don't think they did it to be anything major. I want to take this to a whole new level, I really want this project out there, I want it to stand out.
Why does Windows, Mac and Ubuntu get pc and mobile counterparts but not Android? I feel personally it isn't quite fair and that Android should have its potential shown.
For those of you who have never seen my project, you can check it here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2214161
Everything is still subject to change, but overall I am happy with what I have. I want to advance on Android without steering away from the heart of it. There are more ideas I have, but have been short on time with doing what I want.
Now here comes the icing.
I am stuck at a crossroad; I need a team, I need to find those who are just as interested in this as I am, but I don't know where to find them. I've posted this in numerous places without much coming back as far as coders.
I've been told to do a kickstarter, but I don't know the first thing about it, how to find the people, manage the money, who to trust, bring this to completion etc... So this brings me back to square one, where I just continue to develop this idea in it's visual form, because I don't know what to do.
I have been dedicated to making this happen for a long time, this can and will be a long term career, but I need the man power, those who believe in this. But where to find it? I figured since the internet is vast people would come at least wanting to give it a crack, but it has been dry out here.
I am open to feedback and really hope this can get off the ground.
Ok first of I understand the nature of Android, Fragmentation asside genuinely why can't we unlock our phones bootloader? What is the reason? Like the reason a sales rep would give you would obviously be much different then say what a tech would know, so what is the true reason and Android device isn't like a PC for example? Thank you
Verizon policy. To say much more is just speculation unless you were a part of that policy making process, or have access to the documentation on the decision.
jayman94fly said:
...so what is the true reason and Android device isn't like a PC for example? Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's really good question. Smartphones are basically PCs and yes could be made without OS and let user to install any compatible OS. Of course, hardware vendors must provide drivers or OS vendor have to make generic ones.
In the previous sentence is hidden answer to your question. Driver/libs are usually closed source and vendors do not wish to provide them as for Windows for example. Many of them not providing for Linux as well. And Android is based on Linux. So in short, business politic (read money) is the answer.
Also, many Android vendors like to modify Android to provide better (usually opposite) user experience, change kernel (should release source according Linux kernel license) and so on.
Android right now is mess, pretty much as Linux with so many distributions. Google is trying to fix that moving core functionality to closed source play service but that makes another problem (notice closed source).