Develop Bugs

CAN I LOAD WINDOWS MOBILE 6.0 ON SONYERICSSON M600i (UIQ 3)

CAN ANYBODY GUIDE ME ON HOW TO INSTALL WM6 ON MY SE M600i

of course NOT!..
its like saying "can i LOAD PSP to my Gameboy Color"

double_ofour said:
of course NOT!..
its like saying "can i LOAD PSP to my Gameboy Color"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol lol

ravinbajaj said:
CAN ANYBODY GUIDE ME ON HOW TO INSTALL WM6 ON MY SE M600i
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You cannot put Windows Mobile to SE M600i, It is a diffrent OS platform.

hahahahaha

can I load the ROM from other type? like can I load a WM6 from an Atom to a XDA III?

That's about like asking my wife if I can have a sex change...
I really don't know whether to laugh or cry at your ignorance.

sorry for this silly question
I was considering if it's like PC OS that have almost the same core and can be modified before deploy to another station.

imnewer said:
sorry for this silly question
I was considering if it's like PC OS that have almost the same core and can be modified before deploy to another station.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It could be possible like using the HTC Wizard rom for a Charmer... This has already been done... Still it's a silly question without having checked the inner hardware, etc.
So yes, this CAN be done... (if the hardware is not too different)

It is not like PC OS at all. I should probably send you to the WiKi but I do have a bit of time to burn so here is the explanation:
First, you can not load Windows Mobile on to devices with other OS. It would be the same as trying to run Windows on a Mac or Mac OS on a PC, the BIOS (or in our case bootloader) wouldn't support it, plus I am fairly sure there is some difference in processor architecture so it can't "understand" the code at all.
Second you can not change ROM between different Windows Mobile devices because unlike desktop PC Windows Mobile comes in an image bundled with drivers and other hardware specific components. Flashing the wrong image will brick the device, and there is no such thing as "generic" WM installation.
To conclude: You can not put WM on anything other that the devices that have official or unofficial update to this OS.

thank you so much guys for guide me a lot.
I knew that different devices might built in different architectures, but some of the devices use same series of cpu. and also did concern about different hardware need respective driver...but not aware of the encryption there might be...
thx for the explanation~

levenum said:
It is not like PC OS at all. I should probably send you to the WiKi but I do have a bit of time to burn so here is the explanation:
First, you can not load Windows Mobile on to devices with other OS. It would be the same as trying to run Windows on a Mac or Mac OS on a PC, the BIOS (or in our case bootloader) wouldn't support it, plus I am fairly sure there is some difference in processor architecture so it can't "understand" the code at all.
Second you can not change ROM between different Windows Mobile devices because unlike desktop PC Windows Mobile comes in an image bundled with drivers and other hardware specific components. Flashing the wrong image will brick the device, and there is no such thing as "generic" WM installation.
To conclude: You can not put WM on anything other that the devices that have official or unofficial update to this OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
have a look at the facts you can run windows xxxx on a imac and mac mini and you can run mac osx on a pc so it may be possible to run windows mobile on se m600
jim

HI-JET said:
have a look at the facts you can run windows xxxx on a imac and mac mini and you can run mac osx on a pc so it may be possible to run windows mobile on se m600
jim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well it may very well be possible, but not with the tools available to us or any other average joe.

masr1979 said:
Well it may very well be possible, but not with the tools available to us or any other average joe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
go to link and read for you self how it done run oxs on a pc
http://www.osx86project.org/
---------------------------------------------------------
go to link and read for you self how it done run windows on imac and mac mini
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
jim

this thread has to be the dumbest one ive seen in awhile..

HI-JET said:
go to link and read for you self how it done run oxs on a pc
http://www.osx86project.org/
---------------------------------------------------------
go to link and read for you self how it done run windows on imac and mac mini
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
jim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wasn't referring to osx on pc as I'm well aware of that. The question is can you direct me to a link where it shows some readily available hardware and software to port WM6 to a sony M600? not that I could do anything with the info, simply for arguments sake.

it becomes boring...Linux can be load on Xbox...just imagination, maybe there will be some way to load a WM rom within sort of hardward series...(like Dopod 828 & 838 & P800 are most the same series for TI cpu etc)...

Settle down, pleas I did not mean to start a debate.
When I was talking about Mac and PC I just wanted to use the older, Motorola processor based architecture as an example. (Forgot Macs use Intel these days).
Any way - Windows Mobile like any OS can be adopted to any platform - in theory, but the radical changes required are beyond the scope of private enthusiasts such as on this site.
Even if processor architecture is the same, you would at the very least have to rewrite all the drivers for the given device, and that is an enormous task.

it would most likely require access to the sourcecode (not something ms let you download being they hate opensoufce) and a team of developers to make new developing to support hardware they might not have any spcs on (not something sonyE hand out at the door)
depending one how much backward enginering would be required
1 man year of developer time
for each enuiqe platform
this is not counting the lawsuits from ms and or sonyE
and the man years of answering questions of people wanting to know if it works on their old nokia 3110

I cannot work out how to enable HSDPA on my commodore 64, could some one tell me if installing WM6 would help with this?

GT-I9000 development limitations without Windows?

Hello
I've been trying to figure out (by googling a *lot*) what the limitations are for non-Windows developers with the GT-I9000. Samsung's SDK is Windows only, but maybe it's not the end of the road?
Some concrete questions:
* Do you need Windows to get an adb session?
* Do you need Windows to root the device?
* Do you need Windows to cross compile native code?
* Does the stock Android SDK from Google work?
* What do you actually loose without Samsung's SDK? E.g. the BONDI API's?
I really want to buy this shiny monster, but I also *never* again want to suffer Windows, and especially not for development.
Best regards / Klas

AFAIK there is no "Samsung SDK"
check this http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html
the sdk is available for windows, osx & linux
hope this helps

My mistake, it's called "Bada SDK". And at least for the GT-I9000 it's for Windows only. Apparently the Bada Linux platform includes support for some novelty API's such as BONDI (to access e.g. device file system from web apps) and these have no support in the regular Android SDK.
I can live without these device specific API's, I just don't want to have to use the Bada SDK to do anything *else*.

Google's SDK is eclipse based and is available for windows, linux and osx like stated above. I'm running it in 64 bit ubuntu (lucid lynx) and have little problems doing so.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

How about just running Windows in VirtualBox for the neccessary parts.

Darkstriker said:
How about just running Windows in VirtualBox for the neccessary parts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had much problems with trying this under mac os x.
VMware and VirtualBox dont show the i9000 as USB-Device...

My experiences with connecting USB devices to virtualized environments are also poor. Not that it matters much: I am curious what development capabilities you *loose* if you can't/won't use Windows -- not how to run the Bada SDK in a virtualized environment. No one seems to be overly concerned about this (a good sign so I'll go ahead and order the phone.

Klasa said:
My mistake, it's called "Bada SDK". And at least for the GT-I9000 it's for Windows only. Apparently the Bada Linux platform includes support for some novelty API's such as BONDI (to access e.g. device file system from web apps) and these have no support in the regular Android SDK.
I can live without these device specific API's, I just don't want to have to use the Bada SDK to do anything *else*.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't need the Bada SDK at all, because Bada is a different platform used on other Samsung phones like the Samsung Wave S8500. It's not Android or related to Android, other than both (potentially, in Bada's case) being based on Linux.

the galaxy is running android os from google - the wave is running the bada os from samsung.
as such i think the OP has confused the above fact and thinks the galaxy is running bada hence referring to a "samsung sdk". galaxy s GT-I9000 runs google android, for which google has released a multi platform SDK

The poster may need to be aware that the descriptor for usb detection is broken for it currently, and has been for a little while. It's not really plug and go.
You'll need to follow the usual instructions to setup your android dev, then possibly compile a adb with support for the galaxy s. I hope I can be proven wrong for that though.

Superroach said:
The poster may need to be aware that the descriptor for usb detection is broken for it currently, and has been for a little while. It's not really plug and go.
You'll need to follow the usual instructions to setup your android dev, then possibly compile a adb with support for the galaxy s. I hope I can be proven wrong for that though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Compile abd, why? The old sdk does not see galaxy S but the latest one does. And if you have problems on linux with adb not seeing your phone try running adb with root user.

Thank you guys.
I havn't checked again, but I was under the impression that Bada is the underpinning of Android on I9000.
The only thing left to understand about the vendor's platforms underneath Android is why Google didn't set it all up with Debian packages. A common repo could keep vendor specific variants of components neatly isolated; Isolated and distributable without the fuss of trying to figure out what is compatible with what. I just want to run something like
Code:
apt-get install android-gti9000-dev android-sdk --rootdir=$MY_CHOICE
on my workstation and have the SDK, device sources, other host tools, and IDE plugins installed to some working directory of my choice. That would be great

[Q] Windows Phone 7 Port? :(

Isn't it possible with the Desire HD's specs to make a Windows 7 port? It's more than capable. But I've heard of issues with drivers but it was still ported to HD2? And before anyone asks why would I make my phone "worse" or whatever, I'd like to give it a go, it looks really nice
Also before anyone asks why don't I buy/why didn't I buy a Windows Phone, I'm 14, my parents wouldn't be too keen on buying me another phone.
EDIT: In the poll it should actually say: "Windows Phone 7 SHOULD be ported to the Desire HD, and you want it to happen."

Id love to see this happen. It's not impossible to achieve, but is very very complex, especially regarding drivers etc. I don't think we will see this any time soon.

lewispb said:
Id love to see this happen. It's not impossible to achieve, but is very very complex, especially regarding drivers etc. I don't think we will see this any time soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How long did it take to port to the HD2?

I'd also love to see it happen. Maybe WP7 is worse than Android, but we can't be sure without us trying it out first. Also take in consideration that WP7 has been just released, maybe it's been out in the US for a longer time. But here in the Netherlands it doesn't even have a Dutch version nor a Market released.
Anyway, it's hard indeed, but not impossible. Especially not considering that the DHD is cracked open to the bone. I'm not expert but that would mean that it is possible in theory that the pro's can make it if they want.
I'm up for trying it, I love the style of WP7. Maybe not everything is as good as Android, but the same can be said for iOS vs Android. Everything has it's charms, WP7 has a great interface in my opinion. Android has a great mod-ability, making it possible for devs to make Android great, but the stock Android ain't nothing special. iOS has a great app-store, which makes it powerful, but other than that iOS has nothing special to offer us in comparisson to Android.

guys its got nothing to do with drivers ffs.. we have a lunux based device with a lunux based bootloader and a linux fs on the nand.. the hd2 has a windows based bootloader and a nand chip with a windows file system.... windows only does fat and ntfs, our nand uses the linux based ext file system...

AndroHero said:
guys its got nothing to do with drivers ffs.. we have a lunux based device with a lunux based bootloader and a linux fs on the nand.. the hd2 has a windows based bootloader and a nand chip with a windows file system.... windows only does fat and ntfs, our nand uses the linux based ext file system...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't you install a Windows based bootloader then?

kamranh3 said:
Couldn't you install a Windows based bootloader then?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you could in theory yes, but what you propose is illegal (windows is closed source) and if all your after is the look and feel of WP7 try designing a theme and then i'm sure you could corrupt some systems files to reduce the stability of android

Hypothetically
I'm just wondering, - hypothetically of course - how would you go about changing the bootader to a windows based bootloader?

kamranh3 said:
I'm just wondering, - hypothetically of course - how would you go about changing the bootader to a windows based bootloader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suspect, hypothetically or not, that there would be a lot of work involved in someone producing a windows Bootloader to flash instead of our normal android one, I don't see any devs putting in the work for free to allow installation of a pirated OS, you want WP7 buy a WP7 phone

AndroHero said:
guys its got nothing to do with drivers ffs.. we have a lunux based device with a lunux based bootloader and a linux fs on the nand.. the hd2 has a windows based bootloader and a nand chip with a windows file system.... windows only does fat and ntfs, our nand uses the linux based ext file system...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wait so then how does the HD2 do it? cause it is/was running windows 6.5 and now it has got WP7 (pirated) or android or both dual booting.

[Q] Can I flash windows phone OS on DHD?

I don't understand. Is it possible to flash mango to my DHD? Why? I've watched some relative threads but still don't understand.

Stephen. said:
I don't understand. Is it possible to flash mango to my DHD? Why? I've watched some relative threads but still don't understand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you might have seen, is just a theme of Windows Phone OS and not actually the Operating system itself. Desire HD is an android phone and it is not possible to run Windows phone on DHD due to two simple and major reasons.
1. Devs don't give a dubblido about porting windows phone OS onto DHD
2. We all know that Android is much better than Windows phone OS, in terms of accessibility and utility.

...1. Devs don't give a dubblido about porting windows phone OS onto DHD...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, but what is dubblido?

Windows Os Is A Closed source and porting it to android is very very hard and impossible if i may say. and if you need windows 7 go and buy one, meanwhile the thread will be closed.

[Q] Android 4.4 kitkat on Galaxy w?

Google says android 4.4 kitkat is available for everyone. So is it means we can flash it directly to our galaxy w?
Now our smartphones become a mini computers.
in dekstop computers we can install a new os(linux or windows) directly. The OS recognize the drivers then install them directly or from the web. Maybe some of hardwares drivers cant find but its very rare issue.
So why android doesnt like this. Thats everybody install new version of android and its install the phones drivers directly or from the internet.
The smartphones hardware manufacturers less than dekstop computers hardware manufacturers but dekstop computers OS can do it well and avaliable for every kind of computer.
Why Android OS install like dekstop computers OS.

pharatlil said:
Google says android 4.4 kitkat is available for everyone. So is it means we can flash it directly to our galaxy w?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it needs to be ported.
pharatlil said:
in dekstop computers we can install a new os(linux or windows) directly. The OS recognize the drivers then install them directly or from the web. Maybe some of hardwares drivers cant find but its very rare issue.
So why android doesnt like this. Thats everybody install new version of android and its install the phones drivers directly or from the internet.
The smartphones hardware manufacturers less than dekstop computers hardware manufacturers but dekstop computers OS can do it well and avaliable for every kind of computer.
Why Android OS install like dekstop computers OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is just partially true. Windows and Linux for desktop PCs already come with most of the drivers directly on the CD or DVD or at least with hardware IDs for the drivers they can download and install via internet.
Your ROM simply isn´t about the same size like a Linux or Windows DVD It also doesn´t have a 100GB HD, a DVD drive and at least 4GB RAM installed.
So if you want an Android that is about as easy to install on all devices, you would have to make it about that big in size like a Linux or a Windows installation DVD which most of the devices couldn´t handle.
That´s why it needs to be ported with just the drivers for your specific device. And this is also the advantage to keep it as small and slick as possible.

Most of linux os about 1gb.
Windows is about 1-2 gn. Not about 100gb.
İ ha ve a galaxy s3 and stock rom about 900mb.
İf google want to give latest firmwares every device They can make a pc program and it finds devices specs automatically.
Samsung, htc, lg...etc.. maybe dont want to give newest firmwares to older devices for selling new devices.
But why google dont make roms for every device. Android is a linux based os and linuxs difference is its avaliable for everyone. So i think googles s strategy about android isnt true. İt must be same way with linux.

pharatlil said:
Most of linux os about 1gb.
Windows is about 1-2 gn. Not about 100gb.
İ ha ve a galaxy s3 and stock rom about 900mb.
İf google want to give latest firmwares every device They can make a pc program and it finds devices specs automatically.
Samsung, htc, lg...etc.. maybe dont want to give newest firmwares to older devices for selling new devices.
But why google dont make roms for every device. Android is a linux based os and linuxs difference is its avaliable for everyone. So i think googles s strategy about android isnt true. İt must be same way with linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A totally fresh installed Windows 7 already is taking about 4GB on your HD and needs a way bigger partition to get installed at all.
Android is not a linux based rom. It´s a Java based ROM. Only the kernel is linux and this needs to be compiled first and match your hardware to make it able for the rom to work at.
Google only offers the basic code for a ROM but the rest must be added by the manufacturers. Beside this linux also wasn´t that userfriendly like it is now. The very first releases even didn´t use an UI. All had to be done on command line. Was meant to be used on servers but not for end users and though it was open source it took about 20 years from this stage to become an userfirendly OS for endusers like Windows.
So this is like comparing apples with pears. Best you ask Google and see what they will answer you.

İm disagree with you. or i couldnt explain well.
There in not more hardware manufacterers than PCs. But dekstop computers OS can handle it. For example i have got a hp compaq nx8220 notebook. its very old pc but i intalled windows 8 and its running very well. There is no drivers for windows 8 but windows have a feature for it. İ install many drivers in compatibility mode. ( Yes HP didnt publish a driver for it but windows's this compatibility feature solve the problem.)
Im not a developer but i know programming dialectic (i wrote programs in q basic and gw basic but i stay away from programming because of my job.) im interested about java and c++ and im learning. im seeing that developers main problem to porting Android to a device is hardware drivers. İf manufacterer give codes they port it easier.
İ want to say my hp compaq nx8220 is very old device but its runs with windows 8 very stable.
But my old phone and and my wifes phone galaxy w isnt a old device but they r saying your device cant runs properly with android's newest OS. It has 512 mb ram and 1,4ghz processor.??? (my notebook worst but runs w8)
Maybe one day some developers agree with my opinion and work with hardware drivers than making alot of custom roms. So maybe one day we enter a web page (for example cyanogenmod web page)and flash newest rom like installing a newest OS to a PC.

You may agree or disagree. No problem with that. It´s just you are comparing apples with pears. An Android Phone isn´t the same like a PC. Doesn´t have a HD or something equial to this in its capacity and so on. Neither Android, Firefox OS or Ubuntu Touch do have such an installer included that will install the Operating System on all devices. They all need to be ported. The same even for Windows Phone. So rather than arguing with me, go out and ask all the big players like Google, Ubuntu, Firefox or Microsoft why this isn´t the same like fo a PC.