Related
Hi all, I am all confused about which Windows Mobile 5 ROM version to load to my Blueangle. I read forums about these different ROMs but I got more confused. Which ROM do you reccomend?
Helmi_C AKU3.2 v1.3 beta is currently the best one out in general.
Can you tell me more about this ROM's performance? What do you think when you compare it with wm2003se? Do you think it is worth to upgrade to wm5 from wm2003se? Thanks.
I really dislike alot of the early WM5 roms because I thought they were unbearably slow so I kept with 2003SE until about a month ago.
Then an AKU2.3 ROM was released which I tested and it was muc quicker than the previous offerings. I'd be willing to say Helmi's AKU3.2 ROM is just as quick as 2003SE is, and its prettier :lol:
It's definately worth considering about upgrading now.
Thanks my friend. I'll give it a try. Are there any features (features of wm2003se and my pda2k) that I won't be able to use when I upgrade to helmi's wm5?
Hi there,
I would like tyo download WM5 BA ROM, but I'm affraid, there is no posibility to download any ROM from ftp server.
Threre are some problems with connection. Speed is very low.
Dowloading stopped after 10 MB...
Please tell me, how can I download ROM....
Thx,
MCS1
My experience with WM5 was not so good. It's so much slower than 2003SE! I recently downgraded and it's like night and day! 2003SE feels about 100 times faster than WM5 - especially all phone functions! It takes several seconds until a WM5 BA starts ringing, picking up takes eternally, so does hanging up, etc. Everything you do during normal use is much slower as well. It was really annoying using my BA with WM5, and now, back on 2003SE it's fantastic again.
If you don't desperately need any of the new functions of WM5 (like stereo bluetooth headsets and push email), I strongly recommend sticking with 2003SE!
Regards,
Martin
Hi, I just recently converted and I am loving it all the way. Go with Helmi's AKU3.2 ROM as it has given me very little problems, other that the need to just make sure that I read and understand the guide first.
I did find the phones operating speed somewhat slow, but then that is to be expected from a installation that was not meant for the phone. Same thing happens when you upgrade a PC witha new OS and it goes a bit slower. But what you can do is to help it a bit and what I did was to spend around £14 on XCPUScalar and overclocked the internal chip from the standard 400mhz to 530mhz. It is so easy to do, all you do is to install the application and then slide the slider to the required speed. It does mean that my phone battery does go quicker, and I have been trying out different scenarios and whereas during normal use, ie 45 minutes of mp3 listening in the morning and then again in ther evening while on journey to work, and around 10-20 calls a day, the battery used was around 75-85, now it completely drains my battery unless I use my spare.
The best thing to do is to invest in a USB data cable which charges the phone at the same time and even if you have a laptop, you can still charge the phone during the time that it is in the cradle.
The XCPUScalar does have a dynamic speed changing capapbility which basicaly changes the speed depending on CPU percentage used, but I found it slightly sluggish to kick in and just so much easier to stick it onto the 530mhz and just take my spare battery with me.
Now that I have it at 530mhz it works even better that I had hoped, all the functions and compatibility and even works faster that my previous 2003se.
Be careful thought that the process of upgrade may take a few times to get right, so make sure that you have either the whole day to spend on the upgrade or you have a spare phone to hand.
Extra tip, and very important, dont use a external USB hub to plug your phone as when you come to upgrade it gets stuck on the OS Upgrade screen and like me you will have a heart-attack until you figure out what the problem is...
Hope that helps.
Thanks for all answers. I upgraded to Helmi's AKU 3.2 and happy with it. I agree that phone feature gets slower but I can live with that. Other features are working normally and are not slower than 2003se. Maybe using XCPUScalar speeds up the machine but are you sure that using this porgramm will not harm the cpu? If yes, I can also try it.
afaik intel's xscalar cpu's were designed to run @ higher speeds and designed to be scaled up and down to save battery, but microsoft in thier infinate wisdom decided they couldnt be arsed.
So long as you dont enable the 'show frequencies above 500mhz' then afaik your phone is in no danger, however i would recommend enabling that and setting max speed @ 530 (but scaling) as sometimes thos extra 50mhz really help. meyself and a lot of other people have had no problems with it at this speed (i know black6spdz runs one of his @ 590mhz, and thats not dead yet :wink
hmmm, so I will try it
I find an IME switch problem： After I install CE-star 2.8 r1, it will installed two IME, one is chinese "chaji", the other is "chinese hand writing".
there have problems when I switching in those IME. it takes no effect. this problem appears int CE-star 2.8 r2 also
Hi all... I need your help... I have a Blue Angel and I want to buy a universal. But I read that Universal is very slow in compare with fx. blue angel... Is it tru? How can it be true...! because BA`a processor is 400 mhz..! Please tell me a little abouet universal... What is hot and not... thanx...
BA is 400mhz powering a 320x240 display.
Uni is 520mhz powering 640x480 display.
BA running WM2003se runs from RAM.
Uni running WM5 runs from NAND.
The Uni is slower, but it's a far better device If your BA is running WM5, then it's already slower than the BA running WM2003se, but the display is what makes the Universal great
AlanJC said:
BA is 400mhz powering a 320x240 display.
Uni is 520mhz powering 640x480 display.
BA running WM2003se runs from RAM.
Uni running WM5 runs from NAND.
The Uni is slower, but it's a far better device If your BA is running WM5, then it's already slower than the BA running WM2003se, but the display is what makes the Universal great
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your answer... But my BA with wm5 is very faster then BA with WM2003... And I think speed is VERY important, if you would like enjoy your machine... and yes the display is what makes the universal great : )
by the way... you said Uni running WM5 runs from NAND. What is nand?thanks again...
For an explenation of NAND memory look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#NAND_memories
It's true the universal was very slow at first but with the new rom's comming out it actually performs quite up to speed imho.
I agree it's faster than the AKU2 and earlier days, but it's still slow compared to a BA running from RAM, especially when you run things like TomTom or anything else that renders the whole screen in high res.
thanks for link for NAND... Is it so a minus that uni run from nand. Can I also change the Q... What is the plus and minus with the universal... I have now a BA. I know uni has a great display but is there anything else that can be a reason to buy and use an universal in stead of BA?
I Used to have a BA, the universal beats it in every way except size.
Midget_1990 said:
I Used to have a BA, the universal beats it in every way except size.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so you say the speed is not annoying...
I don't know how many of you are running the HTC phone skins, but that certainly is a major slow down. If you use the OS default phone skin it speeds things up significantly.
The processor can also be kicked up to full speed (not exactly overclocking, since it's a standard clock speed), and things will fly along, although I've never found the need to do so.
It's fast enough. It's not going to beat Blue Gene or anything, but it works and is a nice device. Particularly at VGA.
V
vijay555 said:
I don't know how many of you are running the HTC phone skins, but that certainly is a major slow down. If you use the OS default phone skin it speeds things up significantly.
The processor can also be kicked up to full speed (not exactly overclocking, since it's a standard clock speed), and things will fly along, although I've never found the need to do so.
It's fast enough. It's not going to beat Blue Gene or anything, but it works and is a nice device. Particularly at VGA.
V
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you tell me how to put the default OS Skin without losing the video call button?
And also how to speed up the processor without overclocking it?
Thanks
I don't use video calling but you can access video calling externally, don't have to use the video call button. However, frankly I've not investigated this much, so in you case it may be worth sticking with the phone skin.
Since it also disables dialing prediction I think, stick it out if you need that stuff.
But do try it with the OS skin just to see how much difference it makes!
Speed up the processor - the standard overclockers do this I imagine.
I wrote a clock speed changer that will notch up the speed: I don't consider this overclocking, since the pxa27x specifies it can be clocked to 624mhz, just normally isn't. This app was unreleased since it's only for my research, and not required since other apps do the same better.
V
VJ: can you recommend an application for the uni to clock it up to 624?
I think Pocket Hack Master is the standard recommendation:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=246214
V
vijay555 said:
I don't use video calling but you can access video calling externally, don't have to use the video call button. However, frankly I've not investigated this much, so in you case it may be worth sticking with the phone skin.
Since it also disables dialing prediction I think, stick it out if you need that stuff.
But do try it with the OS skin just to see how much difference it makes!
Speed up the processor - the standard overclockers do this I imagine.
I wrote a clock speed changer that will notch up the speed: I don't consider this overclocking, since the pxa27x specifies it can be clocked to 624mhz, just normally isn't. This app was unreleased since it's only for my research, and not required since other apps do the same better.
V
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info.
I try'd the OS phone skin and didn't noticed much diference. So I switched back to my previous one from Helmi-c rom.
One bigger problem that I have with this skin is that i'm using the VGA hack version of Helmi_c rom (the latest version) and sometimes when I switch from the phone skin to the today screen, the phone hangs and only the bottom bar works, so I have to rebbot the phone to comeback to normal. I'm using the vga phone hack too.
I don't recommend using it, but have you tried VJBigPhone?
V
vijay555 said:
I don't recommend using it, but have you tried VJBigPhone?
V
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is what i'm using, but why don't you recomend it?
Is there any alternative to make the dialpad big for VGA hack?
I thought there were some hacked versions of the Eten skins or similar for VGA... not sure tho. I don't use my own apps..
V
Anybody found anything useful on how to speed up this slow bugger? ive tried cleaner ROMS, wm 6.1, changing the pp, and doing the usual reg hacks for changing the glyph, font, and file system cache as high as they will go but...its still so slow all the time!
for a dual-core, brand new device...i was really expecting more.
anything anyone?
thanks.
You say it's slow but in what sense though..
Also, if you expect it to be PC fast then we all know it's not going to happen. Also, fast could be referring to personal preference (I think), cuz my device is fast in terms of menu responded in timely manner, connection is good enough. For most part, I don't have to wait 8 seconds for something to show up after I clicked it. But some programs I have require a little time to load like sprint tv it takes about 3 seconds.
Also, checkout HTC Performance, some say it worked on Touch some say it doesnt due to dual core in touch.
Good luck.
vboyz103 said:
You say it's slow but in what sense though..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i mean that when i click "settings" in the start menu, i have to wait a good 3-4 seconds before it comes up, and another 3 seconds before it will respond. on a clean stock rom, 6.1, or dcd's 0.2.0 rom. messaging is (slightly?) slow to open...
not sure what other specific things there are. the device just seems to be overall sluggish.
thanks for the tip on the htc performance, i will give that a shot and see.
i just wish wizcode could put out their v5 build that supports the 7500 chipset! looks like the wait for a faster device and longer battery is still about a month off sadly...
HTC Performance won't work on the qualcomm processor in your device. I haven't seen any word yet on an overclocker for the qualcomm chips.
I find the vogue quite fast, but not as fast as my 624mhz dell axim x50v with wm6
thats stinkin fast.
My Mogul was faster then the damn Touch guys, come on... half as much RAM, otherwise, same hardware. Explain THAT. If HTC would just get off their collective asses and release the video drivers...
I agree, my XV6700 (WM6, Helmi) was quite a bit faster at some things.
I hate the lag I'm seeing on some of the buttons (end call for one even with hack to speed it up) and others.
trehouse said:
I agree, my XV6700 (WM6, Helmi) was quite a bit faster at some things.
I hate the lag I'm seeing on some of the buttons (end call for one even with hack to speed it up) and others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pretty sure that my dads axim x30, with ppc 2003 or whatever, has a screen that is A HUNDRED times more responsive/sensitive (pretty retarded of HTC to make an all touch device for the masses that isnt have as responsive as a device released 4-5 years ago) and the device just runs so much faster.
everything is instant on the x30. you barely even have to touch the screen, adn BAM. you are already there. whereas on the vogue you would still be in the process of getting the screen to recognize that you had touched it, then wait for it to respond and get moving.
true, that device has a 624mhz processor, but it only has half the ram. this device is 5 years newer with an os 5 years newer, yet still FAR slower.
it makes me so mad how unresponsive the screen on this device is compared to the x30.
I know the HTC Performance app supposedly doesn't work on our touch....but with mine overclocked to 524Mhz, it seems like everything just opens much faster. (I can especially tell with Opera and the Messaging app).
Red49er said:
I know the HTC Performance app supposedly doesn't work on our touch....but with mine overclocked to 524Mhz, it seems like everything just opens much faster. (I can especially tell with Opera and the Messaging app).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmm, strange. i didnt notice any difference when i tried it.
have you tried shutting off the "overclocking", waiting 10 seconds, then shutting down, then waiting 10 seconds, then poking the reset hole and trying the app's mentioned again? is there a definite speed increase if you try doing that?
ludester said:
I find the vogue quite fast, but not as fast as my 624mhz dell axim x50v with wm6
thats stinkin fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the X50V on the lastest wm6 rom and the vogue runs circles around it. The only way the x50v is fast is with one small application open. The only speed advantage I see is in games and videos because of built-in video acceleration.
Nate
Vogue is plenty fast for me.
Please, anyone that has Hermes Tytn, I have all my 3G connections correct, however download speed is close to 700 kbps and fairly large latency,according to dslreports.com . Can anyone that has a TyTN on Rogers network verify that they are getting sufficient speed from their unit ie downloading internet pages, and if so, would like to know what browser they are using, and perhaps whether Sim card upgrade, could make a difference. My 1.51 radio appears to work fine, but wondering if this could make an absolute huge difference in speed, if I was to change to another radio. Someone told me to upgrade my Sim card to the 4000 series, which I did, but no change at all. Thanks to anyone.
hmm
Not sure about rogers but I do find opera 9.5 seems to be better than PIE. This is the version I use.
stoker1 said:
Please, anyone that has Hermes Tytn, I have all my 3G connections correct, however download speed is close to 700 kbps and fairly large latency,according to dslreports.com . Can anyone that has a TyTN on Rogers network verify that they are getting sufficient speed from their unit ie downloading internet pages, and if so, would like to know what browser they are using, and perhaps whether Sim card upgrade, could make a difference. My 1.51 radio appears to work fine, but wondering if this could make an absolute huge difference in speed, if I was to change to another radio. Someone told me to upgrade my Sim card to the 4000 series, which I did, but no change at all. Thanks to anyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm on Rogers. I got 613 kbps with a 0.299s latency. What is it supposed to average?
Good question,, I will have to learn these terms ie kbps and latency.. I think the you should strive to get lower latency figures. I have run the iPhone 3G test on my Tytn and the dslreports speed test, and I get confused. On top of that, I really get p..d off when I see how slow my internet page loads up compared to an actual iPhone. Sure different browser, processor etc,, but it's humiliating downloading a page next to a friends 3g iPhone.
stoker1 said:
Good question,, I will have to learn these terms ie kbps and latency.. I think the you should strive to get lower latency figures. I have run the iPhone 3G test on my Tytn and the dslreports speed test, and I get confused. On top of that, I really get p..d off when I see how slow my internet page loads up compared to an actual iPhone. Sure different browser, processor etc,, but it's humiliating downloading a page next to a friends 3g iPhone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dslreports have never been an accurate test unfortunatly. When i was on O2-UK gprs i got a report of 1.2Mbps lol!!
I'll take a look around and try find a decent speedtester.
If your constantly comparing your device to an iPhone sir then that shows you lack confidence in the Hermes and other device......I DO HOPE thats not the case?
Try opera mini, gets on alot better that opera mobile for some reason.
of course not Mrvanx,, I love my Hermes and the myriad of operations that I can undertake compared to IP and been using it with confidence for some time now. Sure wouldn't give it up . Just trying to get the full use of 3G and minimize obstructions to speed. Someone had mentioned something about UA (user agent) being a factor. Currently using Opera 8.65 on main memory. Had tried the Opera mini,, and loved it,,however, I suppose now that we hav 6GB of data for $30Cdn , don't have to worry about data for now
Welcome to the infection of the I-Phone. LOLL, Everyone over on Howard forums was talking about this topic. As soon as Rogers brought in the I-Phone everyone wanted to play with them, which is causing major data traffic. It started about 2 days after the release, my speeds went to crap. I am pretty sure it will all level off once the initial fad has passed. Most I-Phone nuts are just into it for the Fashion statement. Its a popular thing. Kinda like the Moto Razor craze a few years ago.
P.S. did you get on the 6gb $30 plane from Rogers?
Yes,,,did get the 6gb 30$ plan,,thx Today I ran a dslreport speed test..even though MrVanx doesn't think it much of a good test for now (think he is trying to find a better one).. Am including screen capture of todays test.. I don't know how good, bad , or how far from average this speed amounts to. Thanks for your thoughts on my readings
hmmm
Ditch MS Internet explorer.
Opera Mini is the fastest. Will blow your friends iphone away.
On Rogers. radio 1.47.30
Ok , tried Opera Mini,,,and same speed test and Under Statistics (mentioned just slightly below your screen shot),, says that under 3G under Alltime statistics,, says 673 kbps,and also mentions 462 ms. My test shows Speed: 5988 kbps... I don't get it? How does the Alltime statistic which is 673 compare to 5988? They seem to both have the same kbps meassurement, yet worlds apart.What am I missing? Just added another capture at Testmyiphone.com tested using OperaMini again...so does this test mean anything to you in terms of speed, or is this a useless site? Most of these tests somehow determine that the unit that I am testing, is not an iPhone
Dunno
not to sound like a dummy, but all the gobbledegook doesn't mean that much to me.
My 3G is very fast- almost as fast as my broadband.
If I'm surfing, I use opera mini, or Opera 9.51. If I need to download files, I use Pocket IE because it handles rapidshare and megaupload better.
Opera just seems more responsive, IE takes too long to load pages and images.
stoker1 said:
Ok , tried Opera Mini,,,and same speed test and Under Statistics (mentioned just slightly below your screen shot),, says that under 3G under Alltime statistics,, says 673 kbps,and also mentions 462 ms. My test shows Speed: 5988 kbps... I don't get it? How does the Alltime statistic which is 673 compare to 5988? They seem to both have the same kbps meassurement, yet worlds apart.What am I missing? Just added another capture at Testmyiphone.com tested using OperaMini again...so does this test mean anything to you in terms of speed, or is this a useless site? Most of these tests somehow determine that the unit that I am testing, is not an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK Opera Mini can not be used for bandwidth tests since it will report the bandwidth of the proxy server that they use to send the image you see in your phone. That's why it will always report a higher bandwidth than with PIE or Opera browser. That's why it seems always faster, since it is a dedicated server processing all the information and probably hooked to a T3 or something. Again, AFAIK...
Nanastas,,, how to you like the new Opera 9.51 compared to Opera 8.65,,is it faster? better for you? Just wondering if it is worth the move,seeing as it still is in Beta.
my 2 cents...
dgaud: that makes sense. But to be clear, opera mini is significantly faster in every way than PIE.
Stoker: I like it a lot. it is a big improvement. Loads a bit slower off the start, but the rendering engine and the reflow into paragraphs is really intuitive and works well.
Beta or not, I've been using the different leaked versions since they came, and it's still getting better.
Guys, Opera Mini does all its rendering remotely, so the speed tests done in Opera Mini are just a speed test to opera's servers.
Hi, I have an old Axim X50V that i don't know what do with. My mom was using it for Skype and its been working ok but now that we have a dedicated skype phone and i have Touch Pro I don't know what to do with it.
I had it upgraded to WM 6.0 but the performance was really poor due to some kind of slow ram problem. I don't want to give the unit away and was planning on using it as a dedicated PMP with its huge vga 3.7 screen and the possiblilty of 32GB with it's two flash slots but even that wasnt working to well. i was trying videos but sometimes it would slow down to a crawl and suddenly be back to normal again. i was using it for opera in bed but even that wa impossible at times.
I would downgrade it to WM2003SE but i would lose alot of the newer software that only works with WM5 and above. and the annoying problem of losing all data when the unit was drained of battery.
I read a long time ago about upping the ram to 128mb using somekind of faster bga memory or something like that so i searched and found the cheapest place was expansys-usa which charges $117 to do the upgrade.
Is this something that i can do myself? Im pretty ok with the soldering iron and magnifer or is it really small and requires professional work?
also would this change in ram still cause the same problems with the slowdowns or would it completely solve the problem?
or should i look elsewhere for a better dedicated pmp? like $199 for a hx4700
any chance of getting abdroid working on this thing?
hmm perhaps i might have misunderstood the problem maybe it was the rom and not the ram that is slow
i heard somewhat suggest that some kind of ramdisk method helped the problem can anyone explain this to me?
dont sound like an ram issue
you have to understand that if it came with wm2003
it used ram for storage and one could adjust it
but with wm5 flash was used for storage and flash being much much slower
then ram
pagepool was interduced as cache it was a part of the ram used for that spc purpos
so imho i would look into changing the pagepool size as adding more ram will
not fix the issue of pagepool being absent or too small